Archaeology Under Threat

Are you concern with the state of archaeological sites? Do you think that archaeological sites of special interest should be protected and preserved in your area? Is they a local site that is threaten by development?

The idea is to see what you think of the state of British Archaeology and I can present a full blown report and have exsperts comments about the topics that you like to raise.

If so we would like to here from you.

Please include the site of interest or comments that you like to make other aware of, including area where you live for example Liverpool or London

we need and you don't have to include your name if you don't want too.

Date

comments

31 January 2005

Just came up with a very interesting theory a few days ago about DMV and SMV And living village I don't know if you like to place your comments but I'm sure that it will get people thinking. I have email Oliver about this just awaiting for his reply. My theory is as follows. That most villages if not all lie near to or on existing Roman settlements, weather its a Roman Road or villa or settlement. I have based this around my own area in Durham. Have perversely worked on a Romano British site found that a DMV was very close to the Romano British site and may indicated that the medieval people decided to chose this area of land to build a settlement. We also encounter ridge and furrow through the excavations process, showing that the landscape was used from the beginning of the Iron Age to the present day. Also Wharram Percy has a Roman type settlement and no doubt many other areas will have the same. Piercebridge in county Durham is well known to have a Roman fort and may also have a much earlier type fort on the site. This lies near to the village also in Bishop Auckland another Roman fort of Lancaster has a village, and Walworth has a Roman road next to its DMV. So why? The only reason that I can come up with was that the medieval people decided to place the settlement next to existing Roman settlements as a net work of roads was established and also the land was good for farming. What are your thoughts about this and does your area have a roman settlement near or on a medieval site? Food for thought.

TREVOR

Doesn't really stand up in Devon where there are precious few Roman settlements or roads for that matter. Lots of DMV's and SMV's however.

Rebecca

just thinking about what you said about there being a progression from the Roman to the Medieval in settlement patterns. I'm second in command on a private research dig in my home county of Norfolk, which is focused within a large Roman religious enclosure. Thinking about what you have said...the Roman area was more or less abandoned, probably due to persistent flooding (this is on the Fen edge!). There seems to have then been a gap, possibly settlement was immpossible, or the Saxons couldn't be bothered, until the medieval period. There is a DMV in the very next field to us...slightly higher up the field where perhaps it wasn't so prone to flooding. Perhaps there is a connection. There certainly was almost continuous occupation during the Neolithic through to the Iron Age, and then all through the Roman period. The Romans certainly seemed to enjoy taking over other peoples' sites...why should the medieval people be any different. A place may have the same effect on people, even centuries apart. It's a theory!!!

31 January 2005

Having watched a couple of TV programme over the last couple of months about the Neolithic landscape and archaeology by Francis priory who I use to find really interesting but now find his comments to be of very little worth. Harsh! The reason why I find his comments very little worth is everything that he mentions is ritual even down to the offerings made around the Somerset levels for example flint tools and medieval swords. Why ritual? Why not that someone lost his sword or dropped his flint artefact in the swamp by accident. Ritual side of archaeology is I feel strongly covering up thing we don't even yet know about i.e. Francis priory use this a lot when you listen to him talk. What actual evidence is ritual based on? To me a ritual site is Stonehenge and wood henge along with a church a place of worship. Why do we as archaeologists try and fill in the missing gaps with this ritual saying. Best to say we have no idea. I have read his book and found the same thing cropping up ritual its like the saying Celtic seems to cover everything. What are your views? Have your say? It is very interesting to see if anyone feels the same way as I do about. Ritual landscape and its archaeology

Angela

I agree that Francis Pryor is far too keen to interpret all prehistoric activities as either ritual or ceremonial. Your argument about his interpretations preventing alternative, more worldy explanations from being put forward is a valid one. As he is considered by many to be the leading expert in this area, his views are not likely to be challenged. The problem with Francis Pryor (and several other eminent archaeologists for that matter) is that they present their theories to the public as 'fact'. They do not say, "I believe this or that.....", they say, "this is this, and that is that". After such statements, any alternative theories put forward by less eminent archaeologists may not be given serious consideration. The fact is that books about ritual sell well, and some archaeologists are more keen on being on the bestseller list than stating the facts. Perhaps archaeology books should all have a warning inside the cover, stating that the contents are the author's own views and may not represent the views of other specialists!

Rebecca

There is far too much generalisation in archaeology programmes these days...or perhaps it has always been this way. This is what makes me shout at the tv and finally switch it off!!! I often feel when I try to explain to the public about what I have found on a site that I say 'we think this' or 'this could mean this' too often!! The man on the street does seem to want to deal in absolute evidence. Archaeology just aint like that!!! We basically make it up as we go along anyway, informed guesses and so forth... Not to do the subject down or anything of course!! It is my livelihood after all!! Ritual is a particularly dodgy area, a colleague of mine defines 'ritual' as something that doesn't fit into any other box you try and put it in. Perhaps it's whatever is out of the ordinary for a particular site, something you didn't expect! And what is a ritual anyway...

31 January 2005

I have never understood how the good old BBC can give out such load of rubbish like the

dating of hedgerows by experts who in their field should know better than to mislead the

public by such false allegations. Three different shrubs in 30 yards, the argument I will

put forward is that many seeds do come in from different sources like animals carry them on the fur, man may have planted them in the gap to fill it up, birds carry seeds and do drop them, and finally animal and bird droppings.

This is such a false part of landscape archaeology I would never even look at hedgerow dating. More can be obtain through documentary evidence mainly in connection with legal disputes. I think it was Dr Max Hooper said you can date hedgerows. Many specious as you will be aware grow in hedgerows and should we include them for example, honeysuckle and brambles as well as wild rose species are not included in the count.

Another theory is one of the more important relates to hedgerow invasion, which can lead to a hedge losing rather than gaining species over time as stretches of hedge become monopolised by an invasive shrub, like elm. So I guess that I maybe wrong in arguing my point of views but I certainly will never believe that hedges can be dated if only it was as easy. I would believe Richard Muir theory Peter more.

Have your say. What do you think about hedgerow dating? How can you provide

evidence of dates? it would be interesting to find out your views.

27 December 2004

The British Isles has lost so many of our important wetlands sites of both archaeological and scientific interest over the last fifty years, well over 78 per cent of sites have gone. click here to read more.

27 December 2004

English Heritage produced a report listing building under threat from decay. How and why should we care? The historic building that seem to get all the attention are castles, monasteries, and farm buildings but should we preserve every single one? Have your say. http://www.savebritainsheritage.org/main.htm & http://www.spab.org.uk/

27 December 2004

Looks like the Government in the UK are having herd the call that archaeology is under threat seems like they are doing something at long last about preserving archaeological sites or are they?

26 December 2004

Darlington Council really gives no hope to archaeology of its town heritage and has no cares. Strong words by the Webmaster, you may think. Darlington rewound for its heritage of steam engines and George Stevenson but not so rewound for its museums of archaeology as they is none. Why? The council cuts backs caused the only the museums in the town to close its doors and to become a centre for the homeless. Has your town or city done the same? Have your say now.

These resources are maintained by and © Webmaster of these pages No part of any of this text or pictures must be copied without consent All Rights Reserved. All information published on this site is corrected and was working when the site was launched by its owners