You are currently browsing the monthly archive for November 2012.

Min-till (minimum tillage) is a low impact farming system that replaces ploughing and enhances carbon retention in the soil. Its been around for many years (over half of western Canada’s corn-belt is cultivated that way). Now the UK Government seems set to make it a central element of their strategy to meet carbon emissions targets – see their Green Food Project. Even the likely delivery mechanism seems settled for it says the aim “links with” proposed changes to DEFRA’s Environnmental Stewardship schemes. That surely signals farmers are about to be paid not to plough?

It will put archaeologists in a tricky spot. Currently they tend to “accept” (to use CBA’s word)  metal detecting but only on “disturbed” land (so it can be represented at least as harmless). But if ploughing becomes largely redundant and only the top inch or two of fields are ever disturbed neither archaeologists nor the Government will be able or willing to pretend that using machines that reach down between 9 and 24 inches is harmless!

So watch this space, interesting times are coming. The first thing to look out for will be the reaction of many detectorists when they twig what the Government is planning. Since they are currently petitioning No. 10 to ensure green farming methods are applied they ought to be big supporters of min-till as a way to save the planet. But I suspect, instead, very soon there’ll be a sixteenth threat of a recording strike! Anyone care to bet otherwise?

_____________________________________________________________

More Heritage Action views on metal detecting and artefact collecting

_____________________________________________________________

English Heritage’s “Heritage Cycle”, published in their Research Strategy for Prehistory, neatly illustrates how awareness of heritage leads to care for heritage….

The Heritage Cycle

In the same document they quote the words of the All Party Parliamentary Archaeology Group that noted that prehistory doesn’t feature in the English school national curriculum and that “the UK is the only European state to neglect prehistory in this way” and that “Prehistory should be part of all national curricula“. We couldn’t agree more and it reminded us of what we think is a classic essay written for us by our member Tombo in 2004 soon after Heritage Action was formed. It’s worth publishing once again …

______________________________________________________________

Reclaiming Prehistory

A heartfelt plea for “the myth of barbarism” to be lifted from our prehistory and for our ancient places to be given the care they deserve.

Introduction
The stone circle of Tomnaverie, in Aberdeenshire, is a powerful symbol of the unhappy situation facing Britain’s rich prehistoric heritage. The builders of this majestic megalithic ring chose to position it like a crown on the head of the hill for which it is named: Tomnaverie, meaning ‘The Mound of the Fairies’. Yet despite the commanding location, the awe-inspiring views over the surrounding landscape and the impressive character of the stones themselves, Tomnaverie is the scene of an appalling tragedy.

As the twentieth century progressed, the Mound of the Fairies was slowly quarried away. Today, the quarrying has claimed so much of the hillside that the cliff-edges begin at the very limits of the stone circle itself, which can now only be reached by what one visitor described as “an ever-diminishing causeway of rock” (Julian Cope, The Modern Antiquarian). Many of the stones were deliberately thrown down (although now re-erected), at an unknown date, still others removed, and even those that remain are scarred and chipped.

Tomnaverie – see how insanely close to the stones the quarry is – during excavation.

Tomnaverie – see how insanely close to the stones the quarry is – during excavation. (Credit Peter Donaldson)

Kemp Howe stone circle, in Cumbria, similarly symbolises the wider context of its tragedy. This ring of beautiful, almost luminescent, pink-coloured stones are brutally bisected by a railway line, slightly over half of the circle completely obliterated beneath the embankment. It is a bizarre experience, to watch commuter-filled carriages hurtling at top speed through this battered beauty. The destruction could have been avoided altogether had the tracks only been laid a handful of yards away. It is as though the railway’s planners and builders did not even notice the circle’s presence.

Britain and Ireland are filled with places of this sort, where the monuments that meant so much to the people of the ancient world have been treated as nothing more than obstacles in the path of the modern world’s progress. Indeed, this website is entirely devoted to raising awareness of ancient sites that are, at this very moment, in danger of falling victim to similar circumstances. At least these places, unlike Tomnaverie, Kemp Howe and many other locations, can still be saved from damage and degradation, if we act now.

It is the purpose of this essay to enquire into the reasons why Britain’s ancient heritage so often faces these threats of wanton and unnecessary destruction. With so many prehistoric monuments at risk the main thrust of Heritage Action’s activities must, of necessity, be to deal with the problem symptomatically, tackling head-on specific threats to specific monuments. Yet it is also important that awareness is raised as to the underlying causes of the malaise, in the hope that the destruction might, in the future, be prevented from arising in the first place.

The myth of history
Humans and their ancestors (people who walked upright and gradually developed culture) have walked the earth for over three million years, yet I write these words in the year 2004. We number our years with reference to the birth of Jesus, dividing the past into BC, or Before Christ, and AD, or Anno Domini (Latin for In The Year Of Our Lord). Even when the more politically-correct terminology of CE and BCE (Common Era and Before The Common Era, respectively) is adopted, the division of the past into two portions remains, and with it the implication that one era, and by far the shorter one at that, is more significant than the other.

The original adoption of this method of numbering the years was very clearly an attempt to deliberately mislead. The nascent church, in a spirit of propagandist fervour, wished to imply that the times before the coming of Christianity were long ages of error, that the pre-Christian world was at best misguided, at worst actually evil. Even now that the church has lost much of its political and cultural power in Britain, our numbering of the years insidiously perpetuates its disregarding of the greater part of our past. A powerful but subtle deception endures.

A road slices through one end of Tregiffian Burial Chamber in Cornwall.

A road slices through one end of Tregiffian Burial Chamber in Cornwall. (Credit Jane Tomlinson)

We similarly polarise the past every time we speak of ‘history’, a word which has ‘prehistory’ implicit in it. The word ‘history’ is derived from the same root as ‘story’, and in Middle English no distinction was made between the two. Whenever we mention ‘history’, we subtly imply that ‘prehistory’ was the time before the story began, of lesser importance than the story itself. It is interesting to note that in scholarly books about Britain’s past, the word ‘history’ usually refers to roughly the last two thousand years, just like Anno Domini or Common Era.

It might be argued that the influence of the church lingers on in the scholarly study of history. Academic knowledge, like that which is handed on in the history department of a modern university, is built up like the edifice of an ornate building, over many generations of scholars, each adding to the work of the last. Because Britain’s earliest native historians were monks, like Gildas or Bede, there may be some merit in the view that history’s academic architecture rests upon Christian foundations that exert a fundamentally Christian influence on the entire structure.

Yet this can only be the beginning of the story, because most contemporary historians have no overtly Christian axe to grind. Moreover, they try to cultivate a keen awareness of the biases inherent in all historical sources, particularly those that were so obviously created within the context of a rigidly religious world-view. The Christian foundations of our scholarly edifice may exert some degree of malign influence on our understanding of the past, but they are by no means the sole cause of the dismissal that is implied by the terminology of ‘history’ and ‘prehistory’. 

The written word
The foremost definition of the word ‘history’ given in the Oxford English Dictionary is “continuous methodical record of public events”. Implicit in this definition is the notion that history is, by its very nature, a written phenomenon. After all, how else is a ‘continuous methodical record’ to be kept? Most of the sources from which historians learn about the past are written, because the written word can establish the facts of history with an apparent certainty that no other medium offers. Writing preserves the stories of history in the words of those who actually witnessed them.

Although the Ogham, Runic and Greek alphabets were not unknown in prehistoric Britain, they were not at all widely used. Before the arrival of the Romans, in 43 CE, the written sources that usually inform the study of history simply did not exist here. There is a sense, then, in which the term ‘prehistory’ simply refers to the time before the ‘continuous methodical record of public events’ began. Although this shows ‘prehistory’ to be a far less sinister term than ‘Before Christ’, it does not alter the fact that it rings in most ears as a dismissal: ‘before the story started’.

The Leys of Marlee Stone Circle, near Blairgowrie. How easy it would've been for the road to avoid the circle!

The Leys of Marlee Stone Circle, near Blairgowrie. How easy it would’ve been for the road to avoid the circle! (Credit Andy Sweet)

The ‘methodical record of public events’ might only have begun with writing, but the story of our collective past is far deeper and older. Indeed, most historians would be the first to acknowledge this, and also to point out that much can be known of the times before writing. Yet our culture’s dismissal of the pre-literate past is undeniable. The space on any school timetable devoted to the study of pre-literate times is as nothing when compared to that spent teaching the written history of the Common Era. Most children leave school without ever hearing the name Silbury.

It might be argued that this is as it should be, that it is entirely right that at least three million years of ‘prehistory’ should be skimmed over in only a handful of pages at the beginning of our history books, that the last two thousand years of ‘history’ are more relevant to our situation today. But then a convincing argument can also be made for the lessons of ‘prehistory’ having more relevance to the modern world than those which ‘history’ offers. Who is to decide which has more merit, and why must the decision be made? Would it not be better to fully inform our children of the entire past?

The multitudinous books on the subject of pre-literate Britain demonstrate that abundant enough material could be found to rectify this imbalance in the nation’s education. The absence of writing does not mean that we do not know enough of those times to describe them to our children in far fuller detail than the oversimplified and distorted outline which is currently on offer in our schools. There is an abundance of evidence from which we can learn of pre-literate times, the numerous monuments that Heritage Action exists to protect foremost in this cultural legacy.

The myth of civilisation
There is a tacit assumption, in our culture, that civilisation is altogether a good thing. Our leaders speak of Western societies as “the civilised world” sharing “civilised values”, referring to their enemies as “the enemies of civilisation”. It is considered high praise to be referred to as ‘very civilised’, and conversely a grave insult to be told that your behaviour is ‘uncivilised’. Civilised, to most people, is synonymous with words like cultured, polite and intelligent. Uncivilised, conversely, is popularly identified with terms such as barbaric, thuggish and ignorant.

The latest edition of the Oxford English Dictionary defines civilisation as “an advanced stage or system of human social development”. The word originates in the Latin civis, meaning ‘city dweller’, which is also the ancestor of our word ‘city’. Despite the dictionary’s vagueness as to the exact nature of this “advanced stage or system”, it is safe to say that the defining characteristic of civilisation is urban life. Cities, so the story goes, are only possible in societies where people’s social skills are sufficiently highly evolved to enable them to live peacefully with large numbers of other people.

The Broad Stone, Dorset. Once part of a stone circle, not quite destroyed but forgotten in the wake of the A35.

The Broad Stone, Dorset. Once part of a stone circle, not quite destroyed but forgotten in the wake of the A35. (Credit Jamie Stone)

The word civilisation, then, implies that the people of non-urban societies are under-developed, immature, uncooperative and anti-social. Indeed, the Romans originally began to refer to themselves as civis out of a smug sense of cultural superiority. It was a word they used to set themselves apart from those who they looked down on as primitive, the ‘barbarians’ who they believed to be too socially backward to live in cities. Civilisation is truly a xenophobic word, both born of and perpetuating a divisive us-and-them mentality.

The British empire in India attempted to disguise its true purpose, the acquisition of land, natural resources and power, with high-sounding talk of a “civilising mission”. Its missionaries made the same claim in Africa, as did the conquistadors in South America, and a legion of other servants of Empire all over the world. The concept of civilisation first came to Britain in exactly the same way: as Roman imperial propaganda designed to denigrate and disregard the ‘savage’ pre-Roman world by implying that the invaders had saved us from barbarism.

The relevance of this to our culture’s dismissal of the pre-literate, prehistoric past is clear. Historians believe civilisation to have arrived in Britain at the same time as both writing and history: with the Roman invasion. Indeed, the 1994 Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary defines civilisation as “the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained “. It seems more than coincidental that our ‘civilised’ society should undervalue its pre-literate past. Those times are also said to be before civilisation, when people are believed to have been brutal and barbaric.

The myth of barbarism
The Roman dismissal of Britain’s pre-Roman past became entrenched ever more deeply in our culture by long centuries of Christianity and persists to this day. It is still the popularly-held belief that the people of pre-Roman Britain were in some way subhuman, animalistic, ape-like (although there’s nothing wrong with being an animal or an ape). Within a few years of the Roman invasion, the social climbers amongst the indigenous population were dressing in Roman clothes, living in Roman-style houses and learning Latin. ‘Roman’ quickly became synonymous with ‘fashionable’.

Barbarism is said to be the absence of civilisation, and the 1949 Oxford English Dictionary defines civilise as “bring out of barbarism”. It derives, via the Latin barbaria (which refers to a country of barbarians), from the Greek word barbaros, meaning ‘foreign, strange, ignorant’. Etymological dictionaries suggest that its ‘bar-bar’ sound was likely to have originated as a mocking imitation of the ‘unintelligible’ speech of foreigners. There is, then, no need for shame in the face of our ‘barbarian’ past: the word barbarian is every bit as xenophobic as civilisation.

A cairn near the famous Callanish on the Isle of Lewis – cut in half by a road.

A cairn near the famous Callanish on the Isle of Lewis – cut in half by a road. (Credit Andy Sweet)

The slanders that are heaped upon the ‘barbarian’ need to be recognised as the racist slurs that they are. The absence of cities in pre-Roman Britain does not mean that people were anti-social or uncooperative, just as the presence of cities does not demonstrate their ability to live together in perfect harmony. Silbury Hill, described in full elsewhere on this website, is but one spectacular fruit of mass cooperation in pre-urban Britain, whilst the ruthless empire-building of the city-dwelling Romans can hardly be described as either cooperative or sociable.

The absence of civilisation, barbarism, is popularly thought to imply a higher level of violence than that which is found amongst ‘civilised’ people. To modern ears, the word ‘barbarian’ conjures images of muscle-bound, small-brained, sword-wielding savages. Yet there is no evidence at all to suggest that the presence of cities makes a society either more or less violent. Pre-urban Britain was sometimes a violent place, just as it can be today, but then the city-dwelling Romans, with their love of war, crucifixion and the amphitheatre, can hardly be described as a pacifist people.

The idea that pre-literate, barbarian Britain lacked both intelligence and culture because it lacked writing is another popular misconception. Even Caesar wrote with some degree of awe about the sophisticated education of Britain’s Druids, who each memorised a rich oral tradition in its entirety during their twenty years of training. He remarked: “they consider it improper to entrust their studies to writing… [in case] the student should rely on the written word and neglect the exercise of his memory”. Writing was used only for mundane, usually financial, matters.

The legacy
Britain is filled with prehistoric monuments whose builders could only have been intelligent, thoughtful, patient, inspired, skilful, cooperative and knowledgeable, amongst many other admirable qualities. The sheer scale of monuments like Silbury, Avebury, Stonehenge, Stanton Drew, The Ring of Brodgar and Callanish demonstrate, to begin with, that their builders were materially secure and optimistic about their future. Those who are engaged in a struggle for survival cannot devote the labour of so many to monument-construction without starving to death, their works left unfinished.

The builders of ancient monuments had a highly sophisticated sense of aesthetics. The beauty of their constructions enthrals us to this day, delighting the painter, poet, photographer, musician and film-maker alike. More than being beautiful in their own right, however, the positioning of these monuments reveals an exquisite sensitivity to the aesthetics of landscape. The Castlerigg stone circle, for instance, stands at the centre of a vast, natural amphitheatre, majestic hills towering in a stately ring around it, utterly spectacular scenery that attracts hundreds of visitors every summer’s day.

Other sites reveal the locations from which landscape features take on human forms. At the Callanish standing stones, for example, on the Hebridean Isle of Lewis, the hills on the horizon conspire to form the shape of a recumbent female figure, who has long been known locally as the Cailleach na Monteach (‘hag of the moors’, who is also known as Sleeping Beauty). The various monuments of the Callanish complex all reveal different aspects of Sleeping Beauty’s character: from one stone circle she appears to be pregnant, for instance, whilst at another site she is cradled between two hills like a tiny baby.

'Sleeping Beauty' on the horizon nearly fills this picture. Her head is on the right – she's lying on her back. Nose, breasts, pubic mound, and legs all clearly defined.

‘Sleeping Beauty’ on the horizon nearly fills this picture. Her head is on the right – she’s lying on her back. Nose, breasts, pubic mound, and legs all clearly defined. (Credit: Tim Clark)

Once every nineteen years, as seen from the main avenue at Callanish, the Moon rises out of Sleeping Beauty’s heart and dances eastward along the horizon, barely rising into the sky at all. It sets just short of the main Callanish circle itself, but reappears a moment later through a notch in the horizon, the pale light shivering out from the very centre of the ring. The Moon is a notoriously erratic celestial object, and this spectacular drama can only be made to unfold from a very particular location. Careful scientific observation and an inspired artistic eye were both essential to the positioning of Callanish.

Further examples of this sort of monumental art and science abound, from the Cumbrian stones known as the Giant’s Grave, which reveal a sleeping giant in hills called Black Combe, to Stonehenge’s famous alignment on the midsummer sunrise. These places are far too numerous to detail fully here, and I recommend Julian Cope’s The Modern Antiquarian to those wishing to learn more of them. Suffice it to say that the legacy of the megalith-builders reveals them to have been skilled artists, astronomers, mathematicians, engineers and much more.

Conclusion
Why has the ring of Tomnaverie been all but ruined by quarrying that could have taken place elsewhere? Why have the railway tracks at Kemp Howe obliterated over half of the stone circle, when the destruction could have been avoided by laying them a few yards away? Why has Silbury Hill been in danger of collapse for nearly four years now, as I write these words, when the damage could have been repaired? Why are the Thornborough Henges in imminent danger of suffering the same senseless fate as Tomnaverie?

Kemp Howe Stone Circle – some of its stones are believed to still be under the railway embankment

Kemp Howe Stone Circle – some of its stones are believed to still be under the railway embankment
(Credit Stubob)

Our prehistoric heritage is desperately undervalued. If it were Canterbury Cathedral, and not Silbury Hill, that were at risk of collapse then the structure would have been made sound long ago. The comparison is very relevant: Silbury has a clear historical importance in terms of both national and world heritage, and is of central significance to the spirituality of many thousands of people in both modern Britain and the world at large, as it was in the ancient past. In the face of such unequal treatment our culture’s undervaluing of its prehistoric heritage is hard to deny.

This essay has argued that the many dangers facing Britain’s ancient monuments, and also much of the damage already done, are symptomatic of a wider problem in our understanding of the past. I have attempted to give what I see as the reasons for the tragic disregarding of the greater part of our past. I have pointed out what I believe to be prejudices in the way our culture views the people of prehistory. I have traced what I see as the historical causes of these prejudices, arguing that they originated in the Roman empire and were perpetuated and deeply embedded in our culture by the Christian church.

I am by no means the first to suggest this, and these arguments have been gradually taking root in our cultural consciousness over recent years, awareness spreading with the popular books and television programmes by authors like Julian Cope (The Modern Antiquarian) and Francis Pryor (Britain BC). A re-evaluation of our past may be underway, and it is possible that soon the judgemental measuring up of prehistoric Britain’s culture using the distorted Roman standard of civilisation will be ended. In the mean-time prejudices persist, and we who care must take all the action that we can to protect our past.

Out there on the heath, hidden from the city-centres, our precious ancient heritage stands forgotten, ignored and, all too often, endangered. It is our heritage, and it belongs to us all. If it is to be saved then awareness and action are the duties of each and every one of us. Are we to sit indoors whilst the quarrymen and road-builders draw up their plans, unaware of our loss even when we are robbed? Will we always write off the majority of human beings to have ever lived as uncivilised barbarians? Are we to be dispossessed, or educated and empowered?

The rest is up to you.

Tombo – May 2004

Share this:

Weather proof (and vandal proof) stones
See here!

Stilts at Stonehenge
The Stonehenge Lantern Procession is proving very popular. 500 people are expected to take part this year. Is it authentic? It’s a fair bet that it is, although organiser Mr Rhind-Tutt says “we’ve even got a stilt walker signed up!” Who knows though, that might be exactly what happened in the old days, maybe people weren’t allowed on the sacred ground! We suspect that EH will be having a word though, if it’s wet and the stilts are making deep holes.

Archae-irony for all!
As a tweet from the CBA’s Festival says….
Congratulations to Corfe Castle – the first Festival of Archaeology 2013 event!
Not the first “festival” at that superb venue though. A metal detecting manufacturer has run annual rallies on land overlooking the castle for many years and they’ll be there again in 2013 despite some concerns they may have nearly cleaned it out
– “Finds were seriously reduced up there anyway this year because its had us on it for twelve years and finds dont get replaced”

(You may recall a telly programme featuring a nice responsible “metal detecting survey” there a few years ago amidst lots of hoo-ha about how it was the future and highly beneficial  for the viewers. But the cameras are long gone, the collector-boys have kept coming, again and again and again and it’s nearly all been cleaned out … Archaeology for all, see?)

In Britain, there’s now a Community Right to Bid, as we highlighted recently here. It’s a rather limited right but in the States it seems some people have cut to the chase without bothering to wait for a Localism Act or a Big Society.

The Archaeological Conservancy is a “national non-profit organization dedicated to acquiring and preserving the best of our nation’s remaining archaeological sites“.

They have acquired more than 400 endangered sites in 41 states across America and they explain their aims very well:
“Every day, prehistoric and historic archaeological sites in the United States are lost forever – along with the precious information they contain. Modern-day looters use backhoes and bulldozers to recover artifacts for the international market. Urban development and agricultural methods such as land leveling and topsoil mining destroy ancient sites. The Conservancy protects these sites by acquiring the land on which they rest, preserving them for posterity.”

Of course, that takes loads of money. Still, if The Archaeological Conservancy has some then bearing in mind Britain’s prehistory is also theirs, we have a lot of sites we’d like to recommend they consider buying. The setting of the Thornborough Henges is still being annihilated daily! Perhaps Tarmac PLC will give them a discount?

by Sandy Gerrard

During the course of this year a number of articles have appeared here and elsewhere on the goings on at Mynydd y Betws.  Behind the scenes I am continuing to explore with the various authorities what has gone wrong and am still seeking explanations. Meanwhile on the mountain itself the work continues and the turbines are popping up next to the huge platforms that have been cut into the hillsides.  The Bancbryn area where the stone alignment was identified earlier this year also contains three scheduled ancient monuments.  These are highlighted green in the photograph below.

The position of the stone alignment is shown by the red line and the blue denotes the new road and turbine platform.  The fourth green area on the hilltop in the background is a scheduled castle known as Penlle’r Castell.  The new road cuts its way past the scheduled areas and at one point is only a couple of metres away. The scheduled archaeology has not yet been damaged but its setting has certainly been altered and its landscape context disrupted both visually and physically.  The prehistoric landscape on Bancbryn will never be the same and this despite its recognition as nationally important. Sadly this was seen as being of lesser significance than the need to meet renewable energy targets. It seems unsatisfactory that it is acceptable to mutilate what Cadw previously called a “complex interconnected ritual landscape” for a temporary energy gain.

A scheduled cairn now overwhelmed by a 110m high turbine

Our next subject in this series is Professor Timothy Darvill, who took time out of his busy schedule to provide us with some answers to our usual questions as once again we probe ‘Inside the Mind…’

Brief Bio:

Professor Timothy Darvill studied at the University of Southampton graduating with a first degree in archaeology in 1979, a PhD based on a study of the Neolithic of Wales and the west of England in 1983, and a DSc on the subject of prehistoric Britain in 2006. He is probably best known for his publications on prehistoric Britain and his excavations in England, Wales, and the Isle of Man. The author of over twenty books and more than 200 papers and articles, he has served as Chairman of the Institute of Field Archaeologists, Vice-President of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and was a Member of the Council of the National Trust. He is Professor of Archaeology in the School of Applied Sciences at Bournemouth University.

Recognized as one of the leading authorities on Stonehenge and the British Neolithic, in April 2008 together with Professor Geoffrey Wainwright he co-directed excavations within the circle at Stonehenge to examine the early stone structures on the site. The work featured heavily in a BBC Timewatch programme which examined the theory that Stonehenge was a prehistoric centre of healing. Beyond Britain, he has worked on projects exploring aspects of the Neolithic in Russia, Greece, Germany and Malta. He was appointed OBE in the 2010 Queen’s Birthday Honours.

The Ten Questions:

What sparked your interest in Archaeology?

Visits to prehistoric and Roman sites in the Cotswolds where I was lucky enough to grow up. My parents were always keen to visit historic and ancient sites and I remember a fair few school visits to places such as Chedworth Roman Villa and Belas Knap long barrow.

How did you get started?

One of my school teachers put me in touch with a teacher at another school who was running an excavation at Wycomb Roman town at weekends and in the school holidays so I used to go along there whenever I could.

Who has most influenced your career?

Colin Renfrew, who was one of my supervisors as a student. I particularly admire his interest in looking at the big picture of how things might have been in the past and his ability to combine theoretical archaeology with a practical focus.

Which has been your most exciting project to date?

Without doubt my work in the Stonehenge landscape which has engaged me for more than 20 years now and culminated in 2008 with the chance for Geoff Wainwright and I to excavate within the central stone circles. We were the first to do that for more than 40 years so it was great responsibility but we learnt a lot about the site and its development.

What is your favourite British archaeological site… and why?

Stonehenge. Because it holds so many challenges that need to be resolved through further detailed study. It seems to have an inexhaustible capacity to engage and surprise.

What is your biggest archaeological/heritage regret?

There is nothing that I particularly regret, although like many I am continually saddened by the on-going destruction of key sites and monuments around the world, not least through conflict and war at the present time.

If you could change one thing about current heritage protection legislation, what would it be?

To make financial support for archaeological work stronger in terms of providing secure funds for excavation, outreach, analysis and publication as a total package rather than itemized separate projects.

If you were able to address Parliament for 30 seconds on archaeology what would you say?

My main point would be that our archaeological remains are important to many people and that for this reason we need to develop far more joined-up thinking on conservation, preservation, and the funding of research to tell us more of the story of our Island over tens of thousands of years rather than the limited view of ‘history’ that so often dominates education programmes.

If your career hadn’t worked out, what would you be doing now?

A mechanical engineer I think, or maybe a lawyer!

Away from the ‘day job’, how do you relax?

Travel, music, DIY, and playing lead guitar in The Standing Stones.

Many thanks once again to Tim for taking time to provide us with his answers. Previous articles in this series can be found here, or by using our Search Bar, and the term ‘Inside the Mind of’.

If you work in community archaeology and would like to take part, or have a suggestion for a suitable willing subject, please contact us.

Bribing local people so they’ll support planning applications is a growing trend and in the latest example people near a windfarm in Cornwall will get up to £150 and it is intended to expand the concession to people living near future developments. Julia Davenport, chief executive of the company, denied it was a “bribe” and said it was natural for locals to get “recognition” for doing their bit to combat climate change.  So not a bribe,  just “recognition”! The Department of Energy and Climate Change uses slightly less Sicilian language though. They say they are currently looking at “a range of financial incentives to encourage more communities to accept wind farms”.

Is it right though? The undeniable purpose of Bimbyism is to tip the scales against heritage protection by incentivising locals. Nationally significant heritage sites are nationally significant so it seems wrong that local bribes should affect their welfare. It isn’t that we’re anti-developments but surely planning decisions should be based on the merits of  the case not on the fact that a few people that happen to be living in the area just now are being offered money to say yes?

A (slightly exaggerated) example to illustrate the point that incentivising, recognising or bribing locals might tip the scales too far.

by Nigel Swift

“I have Nigel Swift’s photo” boasts Texan metal detectorist Dick Stout. “Paul Barford, I will not post your photo (at least not yet) out of concern for your family” he adds.

“I have photos of him (Paul Barford) and of his sidekick (Nigel Swift)” chips in well-known English metal detectorist and author, John Howland. “I’m anxious to let anybody who wants them, have them. In fact, some already have Swifty’s pic. As I’ve said before, if he (Paul Barford) is frightened for his own safety, or that of his family, he should have considered his actions and obnoxious posts before insulting all and sundry. Throw the shyster to the dogs, in the same way he’d throw our hobby, if he could, in the trash can. You’ve got him by the balls, don’t let him off the hook!”

The issue, as they demonstrate they know very well, is that both Paul and I and our families have been threatened several times by metal detectorists who object to our view that metal detecting shouldn’t be banned but should be conducted in a far less damaging fashion. The fact that our view is shared by the whole of The Archaeological Establishment but that they daren’t say so publicly and are even silent about those who threaten us says all that needs to be said about Britain’s current disfunctional stewardship of its portable antiquities.

.

Update 22 December 2012 by Nigel Swift
Mr Howland has now published (on Mr Stout’s website) where he believes I live. It seems (to me) there is now ample evidence of reckless or deliberate behaviour, perhaps with the connivance of others, that could put me or my family at risk and that there is no scope whatsoever for convincing denials. Consequently I have taken the appropriate action.

Update 4 January 2013 by Nigel Swift
Last night I had a very unpleasant phone call containing an implied but clear threat, repeated six times, from a very well-known detectorist (the same one that last year posted on our Facebook page “hope you all DIE soon”). Once again I have taken the appropriate action.

["Bill" has now posted on Mr Stout's site, (18 Jan 2013)....."To add a bit of twist along the same lines…..I went to Nigel’s Swift’s Heritage Action site and spotted his comments about you and John Howland having pictures of him and Paul Barford that you were handing out. I was laughing so hard I couldn’t possibly post anything coherent or lucid at the time".

Had Bill or Mr Stout had late night telephone death threats from professional detectorists, as I have, perhaps they'd laugh less. However, since Mr Stout has failed to acknowledge both of my messages he may have been hoping to rely, if  needed, on the "I wasn't told there was a problem officer" defence and by posting that on Mr Stout's website Bill has obligingly deprived him of that possibility. So for that at least I'm grateful to him.]

23 and 25th January 2013 …..

Mr Stout has at last replied to me. He states that he has finally removed the material in question and that “it is not, and never has been my intention to cause any harm”. I think I can be forgiven for thinking otherwise. Indeed, even now he is displaying two (alleged) unclear pictures of Paul Barford with the threatening words “Small wonder Barford hides his face. For the moment… at least….!!!

Perhaps any fair-minded detectorists, such as those who have left comments or written to me will monitor the site and let me know if there is anything now or in future that I or the authorities ought to know about. Thanks.

20 Feb 2013…. Despite the above assurances (“it is not, and never has been my intention to cause any harm”) Mr Stout has just allowed Mr Howland to publicise what is said to be my location yet again – and has even commended the article to his readers. I have sent him the following message: Mr Stout you have hosted another instance (18 Feb 2013) of Mr Howland attempting to bring harm upon me and my family by publishing what he believes is my location. This has been added to the police details. In the event that he is successful I have asked others to ensure your personal complicity is widely publicised.

(The required deletions have now been made, without comment – but not to the screenshots in the possession of West Mercia Police. I was alerted to this by a respectable detectorist. Perhaps others could do the same if necessary in future.)

26 April 2013….. Mr John Howland’s campaign to ensure as many violent people as possible know my address and are therefore able to threaten me and my family has continued and has borne fruit. One Steve Taylor has publicly written:  “I don’t expect we will hear much from him [Nigel Swift] as he only lives a 40 minute drive away, just a little bit too close for comfort, and I would hate to have to squash his nose!” He has now been warned by the police and removed the threat.

I have asked Dr Bland of the PAS to condemn the threat 4 times but he has failed to do so. The fact the police have taken it seriously but PAS still refuses to says it all.

Update 10 August 2013  by Nigel Swift
Mr Howland persists. He has posted on a detecting forum that people should write to me and that they can find my address on a particular named website. Whether he thinks presenting the information in that way makes his action “deniable” I don’t know but if he does I am confident he is mistaken. Given all that has gone before I think he would find it very hard to argue that it wasn’t his way of tipping off one of those detectorists he knows full well have repeatedly threatened me with violence.

Update 28 September 2013 by Nigel Swift
Another artefact hunter of similar ilk, a Mr Taylor, (who has been spoken to by the police for openly publishing threats to come to my house and attack me), has taken to impersonating us so if you see any obscene or otherwise objectionable comments in the name of Heritage Action or similar or any of it’s members they won’t have come from us. This also applies to a “false blog” in my name which Mr Taylor is preparing. Of course, disagreeable though all this may be it doesn’t make our criticism of the British system of legalised but unregulated metal detecting any less valid.

Updated 20 Feb 2014 by Nigel Swift
Mr Howland today published my address yet again (on the blog of detectorist Andy Baines) and then, having let it stand, sent a further message saying “Will you now delete the address of Nigel Swift from my post, as publication will cause him concern” – thus causing harm and then acknowledging he was aware of it. He then offered the following denial: “Neither I nor you would want to be responsible for anyone pestering him or his family.”  I hope I can be forgiven for suggesting that was a lie. (I understand 2 days ago he tried to post Paul Barford’s address elsewhere too).

____________________________________________________________

More Heritage Action views on metal detecting and artefact collecting

_____________________________________________________________

//

English Heritage have just expanded their laudable information resource by adding guidance on Community Right to Bid. The idea is that if a property that has a community use comes up for sale then community groups have the right to make a bid to buy it.

There’s always a bit of a worry that, like all localism and Big Society talk, it’s a fig leaf for less statutory protection, but apart from that it seems like good news in general…. providing local authorities can be persuaded to list the asset as having community value. In the case of prehistoric sites that might be very difficult…..

EH says “The scheme is obviously principally aimed at securing the on-going community benefit of local shops, pubs, libraries and the like. These buildings will frequently also be heritage assets. Whilst their heritage value or significance cannot be described as a community use in the meaning of this regime, there is clearly nothing wrong in using this mechanism to secure the opportunity to negotiate the acquisition of important heritage assets that also have a community utility.

Nothing wrong, but can it be done in the case of an unprotected prehistoric lump in a field? Can that be represented to local councillors as having, as the Localism Act requires, “current or recent use which can be shown to further the social wellbeing or social interest of the community”? If not then the Act is clear, “Properties which have not had a social use for some years [and some years probably includes three millennia!] or have been empty or derelict are not covered by the Act.”

This perhaps is where megaraks and picnickers and twitchers and such like come in. If they can show they’ve been regularly using a monument for a few years then the Community Right to Bid might kick in. Is it a case of use it or lose it? Does a listing on popular sites such as The Megalithic Portal and The Modern Antiquarian offer evidence that some megalithic sites, despite being empty or derelict  are nevertheless furthering the social wellbeing or social interest of the community just as much aslocal shops, pubs, libraries and the like”? Nothing wrong with trying to say so, EH seem to be saying.

(C) Andy Rhine-Tutt

Last year saw a lantern procession at Stonehenge, “the first for centuries”  and we reported on what was a highly successful event.  We’re big fans as it seems such a respectful use of the monument and we included it in our series New Ways Stonehenge could be used. At the time we expressed the hope it would become a tradition that will carry on into the far distant future and the omens are good for the Visit Amesbury organisation has just released details of a repeat event. They say:

“The 2nd Lantern Parade from Stonehenge to Amesbury will take place on Friday 21st December 2012 (not the 20th as we suggested earlier). This year’s route will be different to the one taken last year too. From the heel stone it will follow the original Avenue route to Kings Barrow Ridge, turning left on to the byways to join Countess Road (North) at the junction with Byway 9a & 37 and then following the footpath in to Amesbury to the Methodist Church.

Tickets are available from The Amesbury Community & Visitors Centre and The Bowman Centre. The ticket is just £5.00 to include the lantern, a bus journey from Amesbury bus station and refreshments. If you already have a lantern and so don’t need to purchase one, the voucher for bus and refreshments is just £2.00. If you wish to take part without transport to Stonehenge or lantern or refreshments then you must still register and read the information sheet. There will be NO facility to park at Stonehenge.

Please note winter clothing & sensible footwear is essential and NO naked flames are permitted on the walk. Please feel free to decorate your lantern beforehand if you wish, the best processional lantern on the day will receive a small prize.

If you have any queries please contact Alice Membery, Deputy Clerk on 01980 622999 or email: deputyclerk@amesburytc.org.uk”

Book your place early to avoid disappointment, because this could be huge!

Archives

November 2012
S M T W T F S
« Oct   Dec »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Follow Us

Follow us on Twitter

Follow us on Facebook

Twitter Feed

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,514 other followers

%d bloggers like this: