Still odd
Just a thought about all this dreadful weather. Will it cause a re-think on having holes in the Stonehenge Visitors Centre roof? Anyone know? (See them here)
The crocodile that shed monetary tears
There’s a public appeal to enable Middlewich Town Council to buy a rare 17th century ring valued at £1,900. The finder, local detectorist Michael said: “we’re all made up that it looks like the ring is going to stay in the town as there was talk of Chester buying it”. No Michael, there was never any danger of that, all you needed to do was renounce you £950 reward – and you still can. After all, if you’ve been metal detecting for say 5 years we’ve already spent a total of £900 persuading you to adopt best practice so fair’s fair eh?
So Smooth
Here’s a video of a sea trial of the fantastic Bronze Age boat that has just taken place in Falmouth harbour. What’s striking is how amazingly stable it seems. It makes you wonder, would a bigger version be capable of towing a raft loaded with a couple of blue stones? 😉
The Heritage Journal 
12 comments
Comments feed for this article
03/04/2013 at 10:44
Keith Macdonald
More cheers and boos?
There’s no doubt the people who built that replica Bronze Age boat (at the National Maritime Musuem in Falmouth) have put a great deal of time and effort into it. For that they should be applauded. But talk of “sea trials” is a little misleading, as they are trialling it in sheltered waters well inside Falmouth Harbour, and on a calm day. If they tried taking it out to sea in any kind of weather, the boat would be swamped pretty quickly.
That should be no surprise, as it’s not a replica of a sea-going bronze age boat, it’s a replica of a river ferry boat. See the North Ferriby bronze age boats.
If you do want a replica of a sea-going bronze age boat (big enough to hold megaliths), the best place to look is probably in Brittany (descendents of the Veneti)
03/04/2013 at 11:10
heritageaction
Yes indeed, the remark was a bit tongue in cheek but the remarkable stability of the vessel was very striking and does make one wonder if a larger version might well be seaworthy.
It’s worth going into, for the opponents of human transport often imply the sea leg of the journey would be virtually impossible, which is yet to be established. They also suggest the land portion of the journey would be almost unachievable – but that also is open to question. Blue stones are 3 -5 tons and could be almost picked up and carried in a cradle by a fit gang of men – so against that background dragging them doesn’t seem so impossible to imagine.
03/04/2013 at 13:26
Keith Macdonald
Agreed, worth going into. The vessel is stable as a container for a number of relatively light people moving across rivers. But it would not be suitable for moving heavy stone objects in open water.
I do wonder who “the opponents of human transport” are. I don’t think they are people in engineering or logistics, as they are the ones showing us how big stones (or large amounts of trade goods) can be moved surprisingly long distances by surprisingly few people,
03/04/2013 at 13:43
heritageaction
Personally I wouldn’t get into a boat with a stone, though I’d be happy to be in a boat that was towing one on a barge or raft – but then only if the tow rope could be instantly disengaged if necessary!
“I do wonder who “the opponents of human transport” are. I don’t think they are people in engineering or logistics”
A number of us were in the Stonehengineers – led by a very practical carpenter advised by an engineer/physicist. We “rowed” a 14 tonner uphill and then the local tug ‘o war club pulled it up at quite a lick, and didn’t slow down at all when they went beyond the log rollers. That was the equivalent of four or five blue stones . Human transport is very do-able.
03/04/2013 at 16:09
zappafan
“I spoke to the landowner and his wife and we’re all made up that it looks like the ring is going to stay in the town as there was talk of Chester buying it.”
I copied the EXACT quote from the article as you omitted a key part from the start ““I spoke to the landowner and his wife” . Is the landowner also complicit in the selling of this historical find as with the key part of the quote re-instated, it seems to be the case. This says an awful lot about landowners and their monetary view of the common heritage
03/04/2013 at 17:26
heritageaction
It is true it would be far better if landowners were more civic minded. but of course they are one off beneficiaries who aren’t going out specifically to find stuff and they don’t say, ad nauseam, “I’m only in it for the history” – so they’re hardly in the same league as artefact hunters.
03/04/2013 at 18:39
zappafan
Are they ‘one off’ beneficiaries?? I would suggest that the common practise of landowners entering into finds agreements and how easy it is for detecotrists to secure permission to search, is indicative of a wider picture of how landowners view quite positively the plundering of the past and how they themselves hope to financially benefit from the activity. Certainly food for thought.
03/04/2013 at 18:57
heritageaction
Well, artefact hunters saying landowners are on the same moral plane as themselves is certainly a familiar theme amongst some artefact hunters, little realising that saying someone is as bad as them doesn’t actually make them look better themselves!
If Ebay was wall-to-wall farmers selling finds you might have a point but it isn’t.
03/04/2013 at 19:10
zappafan
I’m saying that the landowners that allow detecting to be carried out are certainly as bad as the detectorists themselves. Of course eBay isn’t wall to wall with farmers selling finds as farmers don’t metal detect but the sheer volume of finds on eBay does suggest that farmers hold ultimate responsibility for their land and if the scale of depletion is as large as it seems to be then they the farmers should also share the burden of blame for allowing such a ridiculous situation to carry on. Farmers silence on the matter speaks volumes doesn’t it.
03/04/2013 at 19:56
heritageaction
I’m saying that the landowners that allow detecting to be carried out are certainly as bad as the detectorists themselves.
Not really. Don’t forget the downside is kept from them by PAS and most detectorists and they are given the impression that that which would get the detectorist jailed elsewhere is actually beneficial.
“Farmers silence on the matter speaks volumes doesn’t it”.
Actually, it speaks more of the fact they aren’t properly outreached to. One full page advert in the Farmers Times would make a massive difference to heritage preservation.
04/04/2013 at 10:51
zappafan
Au contraire, farmers are outreached to very effectively and on a very regular basis in every newspaper and TV programme that shows the apparent riches of gold and silver under the very soil that they own, just waiting to be found by a member of the public with time, patience and a metal detector. This is why farmers willingly let metal detectorists onto their land in the hope that they may just find something shiny and valuable.
In the UK we have developed both the cult of celebrity and cult of shiny old ‘things’ and this is a worrying cultural shift that seems to be gaining momentum. I’m half expecting Simon Cowells next offering to be “Britains got shiny” where the public stand on stage parading old shiny things and the public votes on what stays and what gets binned.
04/04/2013 at 11:21
heritageaction
“Au contraire, farmers are outreached to very effectively and on a very regular basis in every newspaper and TV programme that shows the apparent riches of gold and silver under the very soil that they own, just waiting to be found by a member of the public with time, patience and a metal detector.”
Exactly. But it’s not the proper message is it? Not the one PAS is paid to deliver. In fact, your “cult of shiny old ‘things’”, the “worrying cultural shift that seems to be gaining momentum” is being promoted by PAS through “Britain’s Secret Treasures”, the non-thinking man’s version of Time Team. And once the Establishment opens that door things go downhill further. ITV is about to launch a programme in which Gary Brun of all people (who doesn’t believe the Responsibility Code needs to be adhered to) will revisit hoard sites armed with better (deeper?) machines in pursuit of more treasure (from the archaeological layers?)
“Britains got shiny”
Excellent. May I use it?