|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » New online atlas of UK and Ireland hillforts |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
thesweetcheat 6209 posts |
Jun 22, 2017, 07:33
|
||
|
"For the first time, a detailed online atlas has drawn together the locations and particulars of the UK and Ireland’s hill forts and come to the conclusion that there are more than 4,000 of them, mostly dating from the iron age. The project has been long and not without challenges. Scores of researchers – experts and volunteer hill fort hunters – have spent five years pinpointing the sites and collating information on them. Their task has been made more complicated by the term “hill fort”. Many of the sites that make it on to the atlas, which goes live on Thursday, are not on hills and are not really forts." https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/22/hillforts-uk-ireland-mapped-first-time-online-database-atlas?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Jun 22, 2017, 17:17
|
||
I don't wish to cause embarrassment, but worth pointing out that some here were against this project when it was just starting up and being discussed on this forum a few years ago because it was perceived as having a 'Placard waving', 'David Cameron Big Society' nature. There was a feeling, from some quarters, that it was 'getting people to work for nothing'.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 22, 2017, 19:16
|
||
|
I think that was about conservation covenants, wasn't it? And TSC was the guilty party. (And I agreed with him!)
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Jun 22, 2017, 19:42
|
||
|
I think it was about a large grant being awarded but people (enthusiasts, students) being asked to contribute their time for free. I thought it was a great idea at the time and still do. Seeing the link posted today, at what i assume to be the culmination of the project, reminded me of the surprising amount of negativity it garnered here. Have those views changed or do you still consider it to be an undesirable way to go about collecting this sort of data?
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Edited Jun 22, 2017, 20:23
Jun 22, 2017, 20:20
|
||
|
No, I 'm not anti Big Society, just anti using it to disguise cuts. But given cuts, it's needed (and can be great) but as I said at the time, Anna Coote of the New Economics Foundation said “It is madness to imagine that civil society can fill the gaps left by a retreating state…” I can't see the Tories able or willing to fill the gaps post Brexit so we'll be hearing more about the Big Soc (but re-branded no doubt).
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6209 posts |
Jun 22, 2017, 21:22
|
||
|
You're quite right and it's a fair point. I seem to recall having two concerns at the time this was originally proposed. I don't think I was alone in having concerns buy I also thought there was some real merit, subject to these concerns: 1. Concern about the rigour and robustness of the surveying work being done by untrained amateurs. I remember saying at the time that surveying is technical and needs more than enthusiasm. I hope though that this fear was unfounded and that good instructions and advice were provided. 2. That this was a worrying example of the government wanting something done on the cheap without being prepared to invest in archaeology and heritage bodies. I still have that concern and in fact it has got worse in the subsequent years. I did admit at the time though that it was extremely unlikely that heritage bodies would be able to carry out a national survey of this scale without volunteers to assist. But examples at a regional scale such as the exhaustive Welsh Uplands Survey show what can be done with the right backing. All that said, I applaud the efforts of everyone concerned and I am looking forward to spending time on the site. Like TMA, any online archaeo resource is a welcome addition. Any apparent negativity on my part was borne from those concerns and I'm certainly sorry if it came across as anything else.
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6209 posts |
Jun 22, 2017, 21:28
|
||
If anyone is interested in seeing the original reaction on TMA, it's here: http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/forum/?thread=69114&offset=875
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Jun 22, 2017, 22:21
|
||
|
No need for apologies(!). Seeing the post today just reminded me of my surprise when it was discussed previously. I believe I understand your position a little better now, but I still can't see a project of this nature as cynical or putting anybody or a group of people at a disadvantage. Despite my fervid assertions in that thread, I didn't contribute to the project, which I regret now.
|
|||
|
Rhiannon 5290 posts |
Jun 22, 2017, 22:28
|
||
|
Isn't the internet brilliant, an argument one had years ago is still there in technicolour ready to raise one's blood pressure all over again. Anyway, let's just hold our horses on new pronouncements eh, because right now it looks like the link to this new database isn't even working? Unless you have an alternative one.
|
|||
moss 2897 posts |
Edited Jun 23, 2017, 07:34
Jun 23, 2017, 07:18
|
||
|
Rhiannon wrote: Isn't the internet brilliant, an argument one had years ago is still there in technicolour ready to raise one's blood pressure all over again. Anyway, let's just hold our horses on new pronouncements eh, because right now it looks like the link to this new database isn't even working? Unless you have an alternative one. Well I won't approach the need of arguments on this board Rhiannon, but I think it is late June the database is supposed to come online, here is a link to Oxford University http://www.arch.ox.ac.uk/hillforts-atlas.html Still love Peter Gabriel's Solsbury Hill, miss my Bath hillforts no end!
|
| Pages: 2 – [ 1 2 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
