Well they didn't put in on the site, but at least I got a reply:
"I would like to object in the strongest possible way to the ridiculous idea of putting a children's time capsule inside Silbury. It is not only a poorly-thought out idea, it contravenes everything that EH are supposed to stand for.
It is not uncommon for archaeologists to leave something untouched for future excavations, purely from an unselfish point of view, knowing that they will be better equipped in the future to deal with a situation. There is no time schedule set for that return, just a note for Mr Future-Archaeologist that will be acted on when the time is right.
With the addition of a time capsule, every ten years someone will consider digging up the capsule, for absolutely no good reason at all. The contents will be well known, and so there will be absolutely no point leaving it there. Time capsules are a great idea, but not in an ancient and protected monument. They have their place, and inside Silbury is not it.
There really is no justification for leaving anything but chalk inside Silbury. The only result will be a pointless problem for the future to deal with. Do EH really want their legacy to be one ridiculed for its short-sightedness, bowing to the need for media exposure, being seen as the kindly uncle instead of serious guardians of our past into the future?
Please rethink this decision. It is setting a very dangerous precedent. Otherwise, I can see an EH future where there are a thousand cremations at Stonehenge each year, burials inside Avebury, and weddings at The Sanctuary.
A very dangerous precedent indeed."
The reply:
"Dear Mr Angry Bastard,
Thank-you for your comments.
There are, like many issues related to conservation generally and to Silbury specifically, divergent but equally cogent and supportable views on how to proceed.
Our position is that placing a 'time capsule' within the new infill will be a minimal risk to the integrity of the Hill in the future and that this minimal risk is outweighed in the present by the benefits to be gained by providing an opportunity for schoolchildren and their families to engage with their local historic environment.
Best regards from the Silbury Project Team"
And my reply to his reply:
"I am sorry, but the so-called benefits of putting a publicised box into an ancient and protected monument do not really exist - what is wrong with using the carpark instead? What possible extra goodness can be squeezed from burying a retrievable item inside Silbury Hill?
The cynic in me says there are other, more clandestine reasons for doing this. Media exposure maybe? Someone in a suit who wants to be photographed in a hard hat, showing how much he is 'with the people'?
Do 'the people' even realise what you are planning to do? As guardians of the site, this is exactly the kind of thing you are supposed to prevent. Maybe the best decision would be to hand the care of the site over to someone who understands what their job is!
Whatever the real reasons for choosing this site over a neutral piece of ground close by, the result will be another dig at some time in the future, that much is obvious. Not for archaeological reasons, just purely to retrieve an item deliberately placed there, the contents of which will be publicly known, thanks to the media coverage - does that not sound even slightly daft to you?"
This topic is locked | Posted by slumpystones 5th June 2007ce 12:31 |
Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 20, 2007, 16:20)- Re: Silbury updates (Pete G, May 20, 2007, 23:50)
- Re: Silbury updates (moss, May 21, 2007, 07:52)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pilgrim, May 21, 2007, 08:04)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 21, 2007, 21:11)
- Sentient Silbury: A lithic laxative? (Pilgrim, May 22, 2007, 01:28)
- Re: Silbury updates (tiompan, May 22, 2007, 07:43)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 22, 2007, 19:31)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pete G, May 23, 2007, 15:46)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 23, 2007, 22:26)
- Re: Silbury updates: 'Atkinson/BBC Entrance' (Littlestone, May 24, 2007, 17:34)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 31, 2007, 20:23)
- Re: Silbury updates (RSleepy, May 28, 2007, 12:54)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, May 22, 2007, 10:28)
- Re: Silbury updates (tomwatts, May 22, 2007, 11:35)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 01, 2007, 18:01)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 04, 2007, 13:59)
- Re: Silbury updates (Rhiannon, Jun 04, 2007, 14:37)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 04, 2007, 15:38)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jun 04, 2007, 18:58)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 04, 2007, 20:39)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jun 04, 2007, 21:07)
- Re: Silbury updates (moss, Jun 05, 2007, 06:58)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jun 05, 2007, 08:05)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 05, 2007, 10:55)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jun 05, 2007, 11:06)
- Re: Silbury Conservation Conversation (slumpystones, Jun 05, 2007, 12:31)
- Oh come off it! (nigelswift, Jun 07, 2007, 08:23)
- Update No. 4 (nigelswift, Jun 11, 2007, 13:06)
- Diminishing returns (Littlestone, Jun 13, 2007, 22:52)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 15, 2007, 07:51)
- I'd take the Fifth.... (Pilgrim, Jun 18, 2007, 07:35)
- Week 5 update (Littlestone, Jun 18, 2007, 15:58)
- Re: Silbury updates (tomwatts, Jun 20, 2007, 17:14)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 25, 2007, 18:21)
- Re: slumpy's EH comment - England's Heritage (slumpystones, Jun 28, 2007, 17:21)
- English Heritage - Another side (Robert Carr, Jun 29, 2007, 07:15)
- Re: Silbury updates (goffik, Jun 29, 2007, 13:07)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jun 29, 2007, 13:16)
- Re: Silbury updates (scousemaiden, Jun 30, 2007, 14:42)
- Re: Silbury updates (moss, Jun 30, 2007, 16:48)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jun 30, 2007, 17:59)
- Re: Silbury updates (scousemaiden, Jun 30, 2007, 20:11)
- Re: Time Capsules? (Pilgrim, Jun 30, 2007, 23:44)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 05:39)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jul 01, 2007, 06:39)
- Re: Silbury updates (scousemaiden, Jul 01, 2007, 08:16)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 08:44)
- Hate? (Pilgrim, Jul 01, 2007, 09:01)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 09:19)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 13:29)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:12)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 15:23)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:25)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 15:28)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:33)
- Re: Silbury updates (rammie, Jul 01, 2007, 15:36)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pete G, Jul 01, 2007, 15:38)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 15:40)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 15:44)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:47)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 15:51)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 15:55)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 15:59)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 16:00)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 01, 2007, 16:08)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 16:24)
- Re: Silbury updates (Toxic Delerium, Jul 02, 2007, 08:36)
- Re: Silbury updates (fitzcoraldo, Jul 02, 2007, 08:38)
- Re: Silbury updates (moss, Jul 02, 2007, 09:24)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 02, 2007, 09:50)
- Re: Silbury updates (Rockrich, Jul 02, 2007, 10:49)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 02, 2007, 11:35)
- Re: Silbury updates (nigelswift, Jul 01, 2007, 16:03)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 15:28)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pete G, Jul 01, 2007, 12:49)
- Re: Silbury updates (Robert Carr, Jul 01, 2007, 08:32)
- Re: Silbury updates (VenerableBottyBurp, Jul 01, 2007, 08:33)
- Re: Silbury updates (slumpystones, Jul 01, 2007, 08:15)
- Re: Silbury updates (Lubin, Jul 01, 2007, 14:52)
- Ask the Experts (Littlestone, Jul 01, 2007, 10:50)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mustard, Jul 01, 2007, 15:08)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jul 01, 2007, 16:18)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (VenerableBottyBurp, Jul 02, 2007, 15:39)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (goffik, Jul 02, 2007, 15:55)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (Pete G, Jul 02, 2007, 16:07)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (Littlestone, Jul 02, 2007, 16:20)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (slumpystones, Jul 02, 2007, 16:28)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (CianMcLiam, Jul 02, 2007, 16:36)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (nigelswift, Jul 02, 2007, 17:02)
- Re: time capsule - would this solve the problems? (tiompan, Jul 03, 2007, 08:33)
- Re: Silbury updates (Pilgrim, Jul 03, 2007, 06:07)
- Re: Silbury updates (goffik, Jul 03, 2007, 14:48)
- Re: Silbury updates (moss, Jul 09, 2007, 15:15)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jul 16, 2007, 16:38)
- Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Littlestone, Jul 19, 2007, 06:51)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (slumpystones, Jul 19, 2007, 09:52)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 19, 2007, 15:59)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Littlestone, Jul 19, 2007, 17:26)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 19, 2007, 17:51)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (slumpystones, Jul 19, 2007, 19:13)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Littlestone, Jul 19, 2007, 22:01)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 09:54)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 20, 2007, 10:06)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 10:12)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 11:02)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 20, 2007, 11:08)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (goffik, Jul 20, 2007, 11:12)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 11:15)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 20, 2007, 11:32)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Robert Carr, Jul 20, 2007, 11:57)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (nigelswift, Jul 20, 2007, 12:02)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (Moth, Jul 20, 2007, 12:14)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (moss, Jul 20, 2007, 12:26)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (slumpystones, Jul 21, 2007, 10:08)
- Re: Time capsule - Lord Avebury's opinion (VenerableBottyBurp, Jul 20, 2007, 00:10)
- Re: Silbury updates (Mr Hamhead, Jul 20, 2007, 08:00)
- And now for the door... (Littlestone, Jul 20, 2007, 18:54)
- English Heritage and Heritage Action meeting? (Robert Carr, Jul 21, 2007, 12:46)
- Re: Silbury updates (Littlestone, Jul 23, 2007, 15:38)
- Silbury about to implode? (Littlestone, Jul 26, 2007, 12:51)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (nigelswift, Jul 26, 2007, 13:05)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (Rhiannon, Jul 26, 2007, 14:15)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (VenerableBottyBurp, Jul 26, 2007, 21:48)
- More details re temporary halt (whipangel, Jul 27, 2007, 11:15)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (Littlestone, Jul 27, 2007, 17:36)
- the view from inside (fool on the hill, Jul 27, 2007, 20:49)
- Re: the view from inside (fitzcoraldo, Jul 28, 2007, 08:26)
- Re: the view from inside (Littlestone, Jul 28, 2007, 11:14)
- Re: the view from inside (moss, Jul 28, 2007, 11:23)
- Re: the view from inside (Robert Carr, Jul 28, 2007, 13:55)
- Re: the view from inside (goffik, Jul 28, 2007, 19:47)
- Re: the view from inside (nigelswift, Jul 28, 2007, 22:09)
- Re: the view from inside (Pilgrim, Jul 28, 2007, 23:53)
- Re: Silbury about to implode? (slumpystones, Jul 27, 2007, 20:27)
- Mr Carr (Littlestone, Jul 29, 2007, 07:34)
- Calling "Fool on the Hill" (nigelswift, Jul 30, 2007, 11:42)
- Re: Silbury updates (goffik, Jul 31, 2007, 17:11)
|
|