+- 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: Druids and Avebury Reburial (/showthread.php?tid=1272)
Druids and Avebury Reburial - Windbag - 11th February 2009
Because human bones excavated from an archaeological site form part of the archaeological record. I could write a report that said that "all the individuals buried at Site XXX are hermaphrodite 7 ft tall syphilitic 90 year olds". Once the bones are reburied how is anyone going to be able to dispute my interpretation based on the evidence?
?He who seeks vengeance must dig two graves: one for his enemy and one for himself?
Chinese Proverb
Druids and Avebury Reburial - Austin Ainsworth - 11th February 2009
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Windbag
Because human bones excavated from an archaeological site form part of the archaeological record. I could write a report that said that "all the individuals buried at Site XXX are hermaphrodite 7 ft tall syphilitic 90 year olds". Once the bones are reburied how is anyone going to be able to dispute my interpretation based on the evidence.
By looking at the site records and photographs ??
![[Image: OzinLondon.jpg]](http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg189/boltonsquanderer/OzinLondon.jpg)
Druids and Avebury Reburial - Steven - 11th February 2009
Hi digital
Sorry if my questions appeared abrasive.
My questions were making the point that an excavation archive should be a full and complete record. When a decision is made to excavate along with that comes the responsibility of securing the complete archive. The CoBDO request includes reburial of artefacts associated with burials because they have decided what those artefacts meant to the individuals. I don't make that assumption; I accept that there are many interpretations of the symbolic or even practical reasons for grave goods.
If a church with a provable connection to ancient burials has accepted that academic research is a valid reason for retention (and does condone exhibition for educational purposes) then I expect a much more reasoned and accurate argument for reburial than just a modern belief system.
I actually have no problem with responsible archiving of burials but I cannot agree that simply burying archaeologically retrieved human remains to enable those remains to decay is responsible. I believe it?s a dereliction of our responsibility as recorders, preservers and researchers of evidence of the past.
On a slightly different point:
There is NO archive for digital data except DAS and that is a grant-aided organisation which enables digital access and is not therefore an archive. If the funding stops (lets all hope it doesn't) so does DAS. At present HERs/SMRs/museums/record offices cannot archive digital data in a permanent state. So although digitising is a very laudable concept it is NOT archiving. The only real archive is the assemblages, B&W photos/negatives and paper records which are deposited with the receiving museum and or record office for storage in controlled environments. I do of course agree that archaeological records etc should be made available digitally but that is a question of access not archiving.
Hi Oz
Windbag's point does raise another issue, if you look at 1960's (for example) reports on human remains they do not necessarily contain the type of information that more recent reports have. If "normal" recording methods and unforeseen scientific (especially approaches such as Strontium isotope and DNA) can change so rapidly then reburial would in effect deny a fuller interpretation in a rapidly changing academic environment. The CoBDO has already dismissed this point despite the obvious evidence that new techniques are a reality.
Steven
Druids and Avebury Reburial - Windbag - 11th February 2009
Cheers Steven,
I was obviously being a bit silly with the example I gave, but my point is that it is very difficult to reinterpret archaeological material (be it bones, pot, lithics or whatever) without being able to access that material. Records and photos are only as good as the person making the record, never mind any future analytical approaches that may be developed.
Edit- one too many futures
?He who seeks vengeance must dig two graves: one for his enemy and one for himself?
Chinese Proverb
Druids and Avebury Reburial - Steven - 11th February 2009
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Windbag
Cheers Steven,
I was obviously being a bit silly with the example I gave, but my point is that it is very difficult to reinterpret archaeological material (be it bones, pot, lithics or whatever) without being able to access that material. Records and photos are only as good as the person making the record, never mind any future analytical approaches that may be developed in the future.
?He who seeks vengeance must dig two graves: one for his enemy and one for himself?
Chinese Proverb
Hi Windy
I wholeheartedly agree.
Steven
Druids and Avebury Reburial - Oddie - 12th February 2009
Hi all. Another quickie.
Council/s are mandated to support my requests as they voted me on. The original draft was, admittedly poor, and later revised into the current request. My research suggests wide support.
COBDO is made up of small Druid Orders and internal anxieties within membership should remain a concern of Council and not anyone else. Relations with EH and NT remain positive and an open attitude is demonstarted by both these trusts and Council. The idea of reburial is more important than individual egos. (COBDO was initiated by Tim Sebastian and later hijacked by others). Groups often experience internal anxieties - what's new, apart from the fact that we are attempting a safe non-violent campaign by a non-violent group of individuals.
It is my understanding that the law permits the reburial of Christian remains from consectrated ground - even if these grounds are now disused. It's fantastic that Christainity seems to respect the long dead - even if no evidence can be demonstrated to show that every person buried in consecrated ground were practicing Christians...
COBDO's request for reburial is based upon ethics and beliefs that are extanct, and should therefore be considered within a modern context. How many times do I have to say this? Initiation, however, does indeed bring the neophyte intom the collective family... unless you are able to disprove this...
For references to Shanks and Tilly, check out Reconstructing Archaeology: Theory and Practice - I read it the other day.
Odd
Oddie
Druids and Avebury Reburial - Steven - 12th February 2009
Hi Oddie
My experience shows an overwhelming support for retention and display of human remains which offer potential for the greater understanding of humanity in terms of social, physical and spiritual development.
I'm confused, do you want praise for being non-violent? what are you talking about?
You keep phrasing things in terms designed to provide you with the answers you want. for example:
"even if no evidence can be demonstrated to show that every person buried in consecrated ground were practicing Christians..."
Its is impossible to prove that level of detail about past people's activities so you have set up a non-viable test based on terms which can never be satisfied. If however, you take a more sensible and reasoned stance, the evidence (actually the fact) that burials which are considered christian are from christian cemeteries is actually quite compelling in terms of proof of religious beliefs in archaeological retrieved burials.
All your argument does is weaken your stance that you can act on behalf of non-christians as you have much less evidence concerning the connection between those individuals (who you want reburied) beliefs and your own!
"however, does indeed bring the neophyte intom the collective family... unless you are able to disprove this..."
As the whole of religious beliefs rest on dogma its actually impossible to disprove it isn't? Just as its impossible to prove it!
However, I CAN prove that retained prehistoric remains have through analytical techniques produced new significant evidence concerning the past. I CAN also prove that many more people have learnt about the past through the educational use of human remains than have requested reburial.
So the question becomes....on balance should a decision be made based on dogma from a faith that does not claim ideological connection or on the basis of evidence?
Steven
Druids and Avebury Reburial - BAJR Host - 12th February 2009
brilliant answer Steven!
?When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.?
William Blake
Druids and Avebury Reburial - Oxbeast - 12th February 2009
hello Oddie,
"COBDO's request for reburial is based upon ethics and beliefs that are extanct, and should therefore be considered within a modern context. How many times do I have to say this? Initiation, however, does indeed bring the neophyte intom the collective family... unless you are able to disprove this..."
This is a classic argument from religionists. However, mentioning 'proof' is a non sequitur. What you have is faith, to which proofs cannot be applied. If you ask for proof and fail to get it, that does not mean that your faith is correct. See Spinoza's work.
Could you clarify though, are you saying that your request is based on religion and ethics which are extinct? This seems to be the substantial point which has been made throughout this thread; that there is no cultural continuity.
I am glad that you have cordial relations with the Trust and EH, but it is sort of their job to be cordial with everyone. They probably refer to you as 'stakeholders'. Though it probably is a bit confusing to have two rival groups calling themselves the council of british druid orders.
Druids and Avebury Reburial - tom wilson - 12th February 2009
Can I just say how much I'm thoroughly enjoying lurking on this thread.
I only wish I could come up with a fresh spanner to hurl into the logical machine...
...something about intersubjective conceptual landscapes maybe...
Perhaps this particular group of druids could rebury the [u]idea</u> of their ancestors, or is that what Steven et al are trying to do?
freeburmarangers.org