|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Avebury » Alexander Keiller's Avebury |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Edited Jan 20, 2013, 08:43
Jan 20, 2013, 08:38
|
||
|
About a year ago I bought an A4 sized booklet written by Caroline Munro (1986) who was a former curator of the Alexander Keiller Museum. It describes the excavation and restoration of the 'Neolithic Henge Monument of Avebury' by Keiller 50 years earlier and was written in the form of a catalogue to advertise an exhibition specially mounted for the World Archaelogical Congress in 1986. The exhibition took place in Southampton in God's Tower House, Town Key. A very interesting read culminating in discussion and I thought her final words quite close to my heart:- 'Today (1986) it is unthinkable that prehistoric sites of world importance can be purchased and excavated by an individual. However, there is a lesson for modern archaeologists from Keiller's work at Avebury. For the purists of prehistory, excavation is often viewed as a necessary evil, to be conducted when sites are threatened, or when the urge of curiosity becomes too strong. Restoration and reconstruction are often viewed as even greater evils. But how many of those purists have gone to Avebury and innocently imagined that they were viewing the last remaining features of the monument? Avebury is the magical and overwhelming site that it is, because it is, in part, restored. Without the re-erected stones, without the plinths marking the missing stones, without the cleaning and landscaping of the whole monument, there would be little to interest the specialist or layman. Keiller was not inhibited by the modern conciousness of today, where the maxim offered by the archaeological establishment is "leave as found", and there is a strong incentive not to dabble in possibly correct or incorrect reconstructions. Keiller returned to the historical sources, and to the prehistoric structures, to reveal Avebury in its entirety. Inspired by Stukeley's record of the monuments, he had no inhibitions about whether or not to restore'. That would be me and if left to me those rediscovered stones in the Great Circle and Beckhampton Avenue we know of today would be re-erected tomorrow!
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jan 20, 2013, 09:29
|
||
|
Here's EH's statement about Mike Pitt's proposals in 2002 http://tech.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/archaeology2/message/9309?threaded=1&var=1&p=1 Last I heard was Mike saying in 2009 it was still "on the drawing board". For me, one maybe but a whole load of them no. As a compromise, one every 2 generations maybe, in step with improving technology. It's like saying lets open EKLB, we could only do that once and we'd be sure to destroy evidence that the future might have found. You wouldn't want that on your CV would you - posterity might dub you Stonekiller Roy! (On the other hand, hurrah for Keiller who destoyed evidence but gave everyone huge pleasure)
|
|||
|
VBB 558 posts |
Jan 20, 2013, 09:34
|
||
He had that road sweeper's broom for twenty years, it had seventeen new heads and fourteen new handles...
|
|||
|
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Jan 20, 2013, 09:43
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: Here's EH's statement about Mike Pitt's proposals in 2002 http://tech.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/archaeology2/message/9309?threaded=1&var=1&p=1 Last I heard was Mike saying in 2009 it was still "on the drawing board". For me, one maybe but a whole load of them no. As a compromise, one every 2 generations maybe, in step with improving technology. It's like saying lets open EKLB, we could only do that once and we'd be sure to destroy evidence that the future might have found. You wouldn't want that on your CV would you - posterity might dub you Stonekiller Roy! (On the other hand, hurrah for Keiller who destoyed evidence but gave everyone huge pleasure) It is the people who don't cut the trees down on the EKLB that are the stone killers Nigel. Waiting for advances in technology before opening it up is one thing but at what cost if it is slowly being strangled. The re-erecting of the stones at Avebury is a no brainer. The stone sockets are easily found these days and it would be the easiest of jobs to complete. Its a nonsense for them to suggest that digging them up would result in their demise by nature. Those sarcens were probably originally buried anyway and are still here after many thousands of years.It all comes down to money as usual and excuses not for doing it IMO. Stone circles were meant to be 'used' and be seen, not fallen, lost and uncared for.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jan 20, 2013, 09:48
|
||
|
Would it be out of the question to produce fibreglass replica stones to be placed over the horrible concrete markers? They'd look better, they'd still mark the positions of the originals, they'd be cheap to produce, cost almost nothing to erect and wouldn't involve invading the archaeology so wouldn't need convoluted scheduled monument consent or expensive reseach.
|
|||
|
VBB 558 posts |
Jan 20, 2013, 09:52
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: Would it be out of the question to produce fibreglass replica stones to be placed over the horrible concrete markers? They'd look better, they'd still mark the positions of the originals, they'd be cheap to produce, cost almost nothing to erect and wouldn't involve invading the archaeology so wouldn't need convoluted scheduled monument consent or expensive reseach. I have several snaps of those constructed for the film Still Crazy, you could move them around digitally and see!
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jan 20, 2013, 09:52
|
||
You can't blame EH for being skint. Anyway, MP's project was going to be financed by public subscription. It would be very expensive to finance the associated research but who could say it was unnecessary if the alternative was loss of info?
|
|||
|
VBB 558 posts |
Jan 20, 2013, 09:56
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: You can't blame EH for being skint. According to such as Mr Best, they spent so little on women and drink it was wasted!
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jan 20, 2013, 09:56
|
||
Well it's a cert it would look a lot better.
|
|||
|
VBB 558 posts |
Jan 20, 2013, 09:58
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: Well it's a cert it would look a lot better. I think it was 'A' cert, but I could be wrong, it did have Billy Connelly in it! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Still_Crazy
|
| Pages: 77 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
