|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Silbury Hill » Silbury updates |
This topic is locked
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jul 20, 2007, 18:54
|
||
|
While the cancellation of the time capsule in Silbury is not yet quite assured I hope we may have won the battle on that one (we've certainly won morally). Thanks to Nigel Swift for his years of diligent work on the whole Silbury conservation issue; to all who support Heritage Action, and to others who have worked behind the scenes to get English Heritage to see sense on the time capsule issue. However, there is now the little matter of the 1968 Atkinson door. English Heritage's take on this is - People hold differing views on whether the Atkinson entrance structure should be left or taken away, and there is a conservation-based argument for both positions. Our original plan was to transport the door to the Alexander Keiller museum in Avebury and to retain the concrete lintel in situ, but grassed over. We have revisited this plan and still feel that this is the approach that we will take, unless of course the concrete portal structure has to be removed for Health & Safety reasons. Sorry, English Heritage, wrong again (and your assertion that there is a conservation-based argument for both positions is complete and utter nonsense). The same conservation arguments that were applied against your time capsule idea in Silbury are equally valid for, and will be applied to, any attempt to leave the Atkinson door or lintel in place. As Lord Avebury has already said, "Placing a foreign object in the monument offends conservation principles, as well as the spiritual beliefs of some people." The Atkinson door and lintel must be removed in order to conform to accepted principles of conservation. Full stop.
|
|||
|
whipangel 137 posts |
Jul 20, 2007, 20:05
|
||
|
I'm in agreement with that. I suppose that the 1968 tunnel may be deemed a part of 'the story', which may lend weight to a conservation argument, weak though. Dropping door and lintel into the museum would be best - get the thing out of the Hill while preserving it's part. But as it was a televisual event, well documented (Branded with the little 'S', which I rather like as a logo), do they need to go into the museum at all? Treating some doors and a concrete block as artefacts is... well it reminds me of the man who picked the 'Alien' props from the studio dustbins to make an exhibition. Will they require conservation?!
|
|||
|
VenerableBottyBurp 675 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 05:02
|
||
|
[quote="whipangel"]Dropping door and lintel into the museum would be best - get the thing out of the Hill while preserving it's part.quote] I don't think the lintel can be removed without losing archaeology and contexts - the damage will be too great. Shame but there it is. VBB
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 06:27
|
||
|
I don't think the lintel can be removed without losing archaeology and contexts - the damage will be too great. Surely, VBB, the damage was done when the lintel was inserted and careful removal now would result in little (if any) further damage. I am not an archaeologist so please correct me if I am wrong here. In conservation the procedure is always (unless there is a very real danger to the original, or perhaps for aesthetic reasons) to remove later additions to an object while ensuring the original is made safe. There is also the argument that leaving the lintel in place offends, "... the spiritual beliefs of some people."
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 06:48
|
||
|
Thanks for the praise Littlestone but the truth is all I've done is shot my mouth off publicly from the position of someone who has no personal or professional reputation to lose. The real work has been done by people inside and outside EH, archaeologists and non-archaeologists, who have been upset by some things that have gone on. I guess their role will never be revealed but they deserve to have their names on a plaque in front of the hill. And what is the crux of the problem? Is it just that we're professional moaners? No. Its that EH have stayed secretive for seven years and not shared with the public. Plus, they have made some big mistakes, which is human, but never admitted to them or put them right, which is unacceptable in my view. Since some of these have involved the physical welfare of the hill they are more than unacceptable. On that subject, I don't think we should count our chickens yet on the capsule. Winning an argument both intellectually and morally works in most arenas but I'm not convinced its enough in this case - which, if I'm right, will illustrate just how unacceptable the situation is. We'll see. As for removing the door lintel, if it can't be done without a big loss of archaeology, so be it. But it would be nice to hear an expertexplain it wouldn't it? (Sounds familiar?) I presume a structural engineer's assessment exists, else why would it have been said? My local builder, name of O'Keefe, removed my living room chimney breast without causing a tenth of a millimeter of movement in the bedroom one above it.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 07:28
|
||
|
My local builder, name of O'Keefe, removed my living room chimney breast without causing a tenth of a millimeter of movement in the bedroom one above it. Funny you should say that as something similar happened when my builder cut through my lounge wall (brick) to the extension he'd just completed. He was so accurate that once the doorframe was in he didn't even have to repaint the interior wall. This is not Silbury of course but the point is that an expert engineer/conservator should be able to remove the Silbury lintel with little or no further damage to the structure. One thing that should be emphasised is that the concrete lintel will not last forever; it will eventually deteriorate - what then? Further damage to the structure now surrounding it? Further excavations to make right what can and should be made right now? As you say, "...it would be nice to hear an expert explain it wouldn't it?" And yes it does all sound familiar.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 08:02
|
||
|
One thing that should be emphasised is that the concrete lintel will not last forever Well it probably would except in certain circumstances when it definitely wouldn't. We now have no tower blocks remaining from the 1960s because with the type of concrete used in that era where it contained steel reinforcement the process of carbonation caused the concrete to become porous and water got to the steel which rusted and expanded and cracked the concrete.... I'm sure it will have been fully checked and there are means to chemically analyse for carbonation if steel is suspected to be present but it would be nice to know it had been. External clues are spalling, patches of discoloration and particularly orange colouring. Any photos? ;)
|
|||
Mr Hamhead 1020 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 09:39
|
||
|
If you want to know how concrete can decompose within a short time, once water gets to it, look up Mundic on google... Mr H
|
|||
|
slumpystones 769 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 10:08
|
||
|
Robert Carr wrote: nigelswift wrote: I did write a grown-up account of the conservation issues and send it to them but they didn't reply. Is that all? I'm sure that a successful campaign needs a little more than one letter and acres of bile on an internet forum. Just ask Cursuswalker. I sometimes think that Heritage Action might do better with a Chairman with a bit more oomph! Do you require a bigger spoon, Mr Carr?
|
|||
|
slumpystones 769 posts |
Jul 21, 2007, 10:10
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: I sometimes think that Heritage Action might do better with a Chairman with a bit more oomph! Hahaha! So do I. But since in this instance it clearly turns out that oomph I was right and oomph you and your mates were utterly wrong I guess I'll limp along for just a little bit longer. Aaaaand...no reply! What a surprise. Take no notice mate, it's great for a fence-sitter to sit back and slag someone else's efforts, but he struggles when those efforts actually come to something. Maybe he'll resort to more trolling, that's always a good fallback position ;)
|
| Pages: 67 – [ Previous | 1 … 51 52 53 54 55 56 | Next ] | This topic is locked |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
