+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Thornborough "debate" (/showthread.php?tid=2060)
Thornborough "debate" - Real Job - 22nd December 2005
The lies,slurs and misinformation from the Friends of Thornborough press release make it into print...(thanks to Arthus for the link). At least 'the canadian' was allowed to correct some of the worst absurdities.
Quote:quote:New row erupts at site near Thornborough henges
Campaigners have strongly criticised the way archaeological work has
been carried out at a proposed quarry site close to the 5,000-
year-old Thornborough Henges (North Yorkshire, England). The latest
row comes after a second dig was undertaken recently at the
Ladybridge Farm site, where quarry firm Tarmac wants to extract sand
and gravel, to evaluate further its archaeological importance. But
the Friends of Thornborough claim finds have been lost or destroyed
in the process.
Speaking on behalf of the group, Mike Sanders said that the
investigation went ahead in wet weather conditions which was
detrimental to the important archaeological site. "The topsoil was
mechanically stripped with quarry diggers and all subsoil features
excavated by hand in atrocious wet weather," he said. "Only a
fraction of the soil was subjected to the careful sieving necessary
to identify 5,000 years-old remains from the Stone Age.
Unsurprisingly, few fragile remains were found and English Heritage
continues to maintain that the preservation of the remaining setting
of the henges is of national importance."
Mr Sanders said the county archaeologist, Neil Campling, went
against agreed strategy to preserve finds on site. "In a departure
from the agreed strategy that required any finds to be preserved in
situ, he authorised the complete excavation of the early prehistoric
features," he claimed.
English Heritage said this week that Tarmac's recent study
confirms their belief that the site should be preserved. "English
Heritage confirmes that the area contains nationally important early
prehistoric remains which should be preserved. We await Tarmac's
proposals," said a spokesman. Mr Campling said the council has not
yet received the further evaluation report from Tarmac.
In response to criticism from the Friends of Thornborough, he
said their information was "entirely factually incorrect." Mr
Campling said: "They say the archaeology was destroyed but it wasn't;
it has been fully recorded and the finds recovered and saved from
further loss or plough damage. There is a big difference between loss
without recording, and scientific investigation. The weather,
although unpleasant, was not a serious problem, especially given the
sandy soil. Almost all archaeology is carried out under less than
ideal conditions. We don't want to inflame the situation. We are
trying to move this forward and develop a management strategy for the
landscape around the henges, create a low-key visitor centre and
secure the long-term future for the henges and nearby monuments."
North Yorkshire County Council is due to make a decision on
Tarmac's application to quarry the Ladybridge Farm site in February.
Source: Nidderdale Today (16 December 2005)
http://www.nidderdaletoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=22&ArticleID=1287813
Thornborough "debate" - Hugh - 22nd December 2005
My sympathies go out to Neil, his team and APC for having to constantly defend their excellent work from critics. I just hope that, if I deal with a site like this, my words and actions will not be misinterpreted in a similar fashion.
Thornborough "debate" - drpeterwardle - 22nd December 2005
Hugh,
Said
"My sympathies go out to Neil, his team and APC for having to constantly defend their excellent work from critics."
I see you are a curator. Have you not heard of scrutiny in Local Government? PAGE were equally vocal in their criticism of another curator called Hugh. Why cant voters criticise the actions of officers and the elected members in local authourities.
Peter Wardle
Thornborough "debate" - Hugh - 22nd December 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle
Hugh,
Said
"My sympathies go out to Neil, his team and APC for having to constantly defend their excellent work from critics."
I see you are a curator. Have you not heard of scrutiny in Local Government? PAGE were equally vocal in their criticism of another curator called Hugh. Why cant voters criticise the actions of officers and the elected members in local authourities.
Peter Wardle
Sorry if this came across wrong, I wasn't saying that they can't criticise, just that I can understand how frustrating it could be for Neil, his team and APC to be criticised for things that they believe have been done to a high level of professionalism, especially when the accusers don't seem to have their facts right.
BTW I'm not aware of ever being criticised by PAGE, maybe I'm just oblivious (or ignorant)
Thornborough "debate" - drpeterwardle - 22nd December 2005
Hugh,
Perhaps neither of us should be discussing PAGE on BAJR in any detail. My apologies.
I assume that by APC you mean "archaeological planning consultancy" which is according to my yahoo search "Home page of the Archaeological Planning Consultancy, an umbrella organisation comprising a number of different archaeological consultancies and practices based in York."
The Home page of which
says "The Archaeological Planning Consultancy has been established to provide guidance and advice on archaeology and planning. It will offer through these web pages a portal to gain information and access to some of the many resources that are available (see Nosterfield web site and the Blue Bridge Lane & Fishergate House monograph, currently in preparation). In the near future it will also provide a forum to discuss issues related to planning and archaeology and will publish occasional papers".
Both Mike Griffiths Associates and Archaeological Planning Consultancy are in fact limited companies with registered offices at the same address.
Best wishes
Peter Wardle
(who perhaps ought to adopt a pseudonym)
Thornborough "debate" - deepdigger - 22nd December 2005
We all thought you had Peter!
deep
Thornborough "debate" - Arthus - 23rd December 2005
No one has actually addressed why the Thornborough Henges [and more importantly the land close to the Henges] is of National importance?
English Heritage and others keep saying it is, but it needs explaining.
I think:
Because I should be writing my CV since I am currently resting, I will instead write about Thornborough Henges, whilst having yet another pagan midwinter drink. It should be noted that when I celebrate with pagan drinking; certain ?modern conventions?, such as concepts of ?fact? or ?fiction? tend to blur.
But some ?fact? first.
Well I think the area is important and worth study, especially when studied alongside other similar sites.
There are of course thousands of Nationally important sites of various periods, which should be preserved and or studied (in my ideal world). But I think the Thornborough area when studied alongside other prehistoric ?ritual landscapes? is indeed of National Importance.
It is important because it is one of number of prehistoric sites of similar age where comparative evidence can be gathered. This evidence gained by studying the similarities in routine and ritual preserved in the archaeological record.
Furthermore, I think the remaining archaeology could and should be targeted and fully excavated before it is destroyed by farming, Quarrying, or some other alteration of the land.
And more to the point it should be excavated, because preservation in situ will not preserve anything at Nosterfield.
To me so far it seems that that all the evidence I can glean about the area from various sources suggests to me that.
.. blurring starting... I'm drinking Theakston old peculier, its virtually brewed on the Henge.
It must be a sign. A sign that all that follows is probably true...
So it seems to me that a future PhD turned into a book about the area might look like this: -
Here is one I found on the Internet from the future. It?s a draft copy.
?The ritual landscape of Thornborough 2009, by J. D. Digger and her less gifted friend.
During the late Mesolithic the area was a wet area with lakes and bogs where people exploited the bird life and camped on small islands of dry land amongst the lakes.
It was also regarded as a spiritual place and people began to gather at full moons to watch its passage across the sky reflected in the lake [note choose here an ethnographic analogy from any historical period anywhere in the world regarding the moon and water, available from http://www.ethnagraphicanalogyforarchaeologist.com ].
Later the Henges were built to symbolise the moons reflection moving across the lakes and covered in white stones both to symbolise and reflect the moon.
It is also possible [note see http://www.alsopossble.com] that the ?elders? involved in building the Henges misinformed local people that it was meant to represent the sky gods Belt. This was done to protect the ?secret-sacred knowledge?. However, local people were unconvinced but eventually fell for the story that the Henges represented the Three Breasted Ice Queen of the North [note see http://www.Icoulddothatletmeontv.com ].
It was also covered in white stones because the makers had seen some famous southerly monuments and there was no way that they were going to be out done by those bloody southerners. Having three Henges was also something of an escalation too, in the hundred years struggle of frantic ?keep ahead of the Jones? orgy of conspicuous monument building following increased production and storage of food [note insert here from http://www.marxistinflitrationof.archaeologists/minds.com ].
And of course the people that came for rituals and to hunt and gather continued to camp in the same places their ancestors camped, the higher ground, the little islands out of the water. Here as well as feasting they deposited bones, flints and pieces of pot in small pits.
Because this higher ground survived as a hard, stony-clayey, still slightly higher area of ?natural? across the site it was targeted by remote sensing techniques producing in 2008 even more interesting ?ritual? pits than were found in 2005. Our thanks to the 2005 Thornborough debate on BAJR for first suggesting this strategy.
It is of course well know that the Pan European habitus [note remember to reference that French bloke fond of stating the bleeding obvious see http://www.bleedingobvious.com ]of the ?burnt offering? and placing various often broken things in the ground had various meanings and lack of meanings at various times across geography and time [see http://www.timetogetvague.com] but it
[Final lines of actual book] ?? it is now generally accepted that the practice of ritual deposits increased in frequency as farming spread across Europe. We postulate that this was due to a 'Neolithic mindset', which believed that as with seeds you bury things to make them grow or become reborn again." [see http://www.surelythiswillgetoneofusonthetimeteam.com ].
Well anyway I think it came off the Internet, or I might have dreamt it.
Happy Midwinter Pagan Drinking Binge.
Arthus
Thornborough "debate" - drpeterwardle - 23rd December 2005
The henges themselves are nationally important due to their rarity. The criteria are published in PPG 16.
Peter
Thornborough "debate" - troll - 28th December 2005
Profit or heritage? Extremely simple.Find the bloody gravel somewhere else.Farm somewhere else. If we can`t (as a nation) protect and preserve Thornborough-we set a hideous precedent for the rest of the country.
Thornborough "debate" - 1man1desk - 28th December 2005
I agree in principle, but there are some significant problems with this approach. My comments below are also points of general principle, not an argument for quarrying at Thornborough, but they do need to be taken into account in any decision on quarrying.
Gravel - ok, gravel companies can go elsewhere (but only where there is gravel available). Suitable gravel is not as common as you might think, and quite a lot of it is not available (eg because its been built on). While we gain access to it through profit-driven commercial exploitation, it is nevertheless a strategic resource without which the nation's economy would grind to a halt.
Farming - well, the farmer(s) concerned only own a certain amount of land in certain locations. If you say 'this land has been farmed for generations, but now you have to stop', then you are taking away their livelihood. They can't even sell it and buy land elsewhere, because you have taken the value out of their land by ensuring that the buyer could neither farm, nor quarry, nor develop. A bit harsh on farmer to throw them out and potentially make them destitute! (might or might not be the effect in this particular case, but the principle must apply universally or not at all).
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished