home
/ the heritage journal
Welcome to the
Heritage Journal
news and views from Heritage Action
If you would like to contribute something, please email us.
Tarmac imploding?
March 24, 2006, 5:02 pm
Judging by some of their recent statements, the trauma of being refused permission to quarry any more of the Thornborough Complex seems to have pushed Tarmac over the edge.
First, we had their consultant claiming the area in question is "nationally interesting and significant" but "not nationally important". A puzzling bit or nitpicking you might think, until you remember that the law says "nationally important" archaeology can't be quarried!
 |
Then their quarry manager Mr Bob Nicholson weighed in with some equally creative use of our wonderful language: "Our proposal actually moves quarrying further away from the henges than our current operation".
Well, sort of Bob, except that 90 per cent of the new area will be just as close as the existing quarry! So it's a case of "pants nearly all on fire" really, isn't it?
|
And what about this: he has claimed that Tarmac's archaeological investigations were more thorough than some that English Heritage did on land "close to Stonehenge" and part of "the Stonehenge World Heritage Site". Ummm, no Bob, three or four times further away from Stonehenge actually, and not part of the Stonehenge World Heritage Site at all. That's the rest of the pants - and the vest as well isn't it?
Finally, Mr Nicholson has attacked campaigner George Chaplin, saying he "is not really bothered about saving the archaeology".
Well! We're surprised! We thought that was what the campaign was about. We can only assume that both English Heritage and North Yorkshire County Council, both of who have come out in favour of saving the archaeology and against quarrying, will soon be attacked in similar vein.
Oh, and Mr Nicholson, you have also announced that George owns Heritage Action. That's news to us! And finally, that he is "not particularly bothered about getting his facts right" - which seems somewhat ironic coming from you.
permalink
Buried archaeology belongs to us all
March 23, 2006, 11:13 am
 |
Heritage Action is calling for metal detecting to be carried out only on terms fully approved by the public.
A new code of conduct for metal detectorists is soon to be announced National Council for Metal Detecting, The Council for British Archaeology, The Country Landowners Association, English Heritage and the Portable Antiquities Scheme. |
Heritage Action spokesman Nigel Swift said: "This list looks impressive but the bottom line is that the wider public haven't been consulted at all. We all own the knowledge that's in the ground; it's our history that is being dug up. Everyone should have a say in exactly where, when and how carefully it should be done, not just a few detectorists and others."
Heritage Action believes that all buried archaeology and archaeological knowledge is our common inheritance and belongs to us all. Therefore:
1. No single individual or group can justly lay claim to it, annexe, conceal or destroy it, or harvest it at all without fully and freely sharing it with everyone.
2. Anyone who deliberately removes buried archaeology effectively does so on behalf of us all. They should only do so with society's agreement and in a manner which doesn't interfere with society's rights as owner.
This is plain common sense. It is high time the true 'owners' - that is, the public - took control of their archaeological heritage. It is high time someone started thinking about preserving the archaeology, not just the rights of those who make a hobby out of digging it up. We welcome the fact that a code of conduct is to be announced but we think it is essential that every detail of it recognises exactly whose history it is.
permalink
More rubbish to report
March 4, 2006, 1:25 pm
Heritage Action Site Inspector James Stone visited Stoney Littleton long barrow yesterday on a routine visit both to enjoy the ambience of this magical place and clean up the rubbish that some people think is OK to leave behind. He filled a carrier bag full of tissues, spent tealights, chocolate wrappers and not that unusually, a large corn dolly that was rotting happily away at the end of the barrow.
Photo: James Stone
Please don't leave rubbish behind: it's disgusting! Better still, next time you visit an ancient site, take a carrier bag with you and do the same as our site inspector.
permalink
Metal detectorists aim for a second own goal!
March 3, 2006, 6:45 pm
 |
We are sorry to report that, following the recent 'Near Avebury Metal Detecting Rally' (about which great concern was expressed - including by many detectorists) the same organisers have announced an equally concerning event not far away.
The Rotary Charity Rally is to be held about a mile North of Pewsey on 19 March 2006. The location is of enormous archaeological sensitivity and our views about it are the same as for the previous event, namely: |
There is no guarantee or likelihood that all participants will report their finds accurately or at all to the Portable Antiquities Scheme. Indeed, statistics on reporting rates suggest that it certainly won't happen, and the attendance or otherwise of staff from the scheme cannot change this basic probability.
It follows that the event is likely to irreversibly deplete the archaeological record in an area where full and careful reporting, particularly of the precise distribution of scatters of artefacts, might have revealed much.
We feel it should be recognised that the absence of scheduled sites from a rally location - the only yardstick presently used - does not mean that damage won't be caused.
We ask that those detectorists and others who shared our concern about the previous rally should make their views known about this one. Heritage Action will be making its own concerns known to the organisers of the rally and the Portable Antiquities Scheme, as well as to detectorists in general. It as in no-one's interest, least of all the hobby's, that rallies should be held 'anywhere that isn't legally protected' since this implies there are no other sensitive areas of archaeology that are in equal need of protection. As everyone knows, that simply isn't the case.
permalink
|
|
| March 2006 |
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
3
|
4
|
| 5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
| 12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
| 19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23
|
24
|
25 |
| 26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
|
|
| << |
>> |
Recent posts
Archives
|
