|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
|
News
Antisocial behaviour means ancient Iron Age Worlebury hill fort is now ‘at risk’An ‘outstanding’ ancient monument in Weston-super-Mare has been placed ‘at risk’ by Historic England after falling victim to antisocial behaviour. The Iron Age Worlebury hill fort, in Weston Woods, is thought to have been created some 700 years before the Romans arrived in Britain as a form of defence. Historic England says it is an ‘outstanding example’ of its type and is also unusual, as few of these forts were created along the coast. It has previously been listed by Historic England as being in a ‘vulnerable’ condition, but it has now been re-registered as ‘at risk’ after people camped nearby and moved parts of the structure. A Historic England spokesman said: “Historic England made a recent visit to the hill fort in response to concerns from volunteers working on the site..... continued..... http://www.thewestonmercury.co.uk/news/antisocial_behaviour_means_ancient_iron_age_worlebury_hill_fort_is_now_at_risk_1_4840121 |
Posted by moss9th January 2017ce Edited 9th January 2017ce
|
Comments (3) |
|
|
I bet the people who camped nearby were very sociable. Nothing antisocial about camping. I am glad the archaeology volunteer pointed out that the tree roots (the trees are massive in the pictures, some appear dead) were damaging the ramparts, the idea that ignoring things like tree and shrub maintenance is the same as "preservation" needs to be addressed. Everywhere. I have seen immense amounts of damage done to ancient monuments by hedges, trees, shrubbery, bracken and heather encroachment, badgers, rabbits, foxes, cattle and sheep. Recently on a fine trip up to Tre'r Ceiri in North Wales I actually saw some people moving some of the (millions of) stones to sit on to munch their sangwidges. They weren't being anti-social. How do they know that the anti-social ones camped? Did they leave a tent behind? I presume that the parts of the hiillfort which were "moved" would have been some stones from the tumbled rubble ramparts to make a hearth. I dont think any campers could have moved ditches or ramparts. How did Historic England know that the hearth stones were part of the fort - were they marked and catalogued? Were they out of place? Sounds like supposition to me. Unless rubble is consolidated, shrubbery and trees cut back and sites are maintained with proper paths, signage and suchlike, the matter of who moved which half dozen rocks to build a hearth seems a bit like handbags at twenty paces long after the unicorn has flown from the stable and the snowflakes have melted. It seems much more likely that this story is about trying to close off sites to the public and restrict access to ancient monuments for ordinary people. Otherwise, English Heritage or whoever is responsible should stop paying for Merlin Carvings at Tintagel and get on with the grounds maintenance at sites. |
Posted by Howburn Digger9th January 2017ce |
|
Some clearance work and maybe more is being planned for Worlebury by the council's archaeologist. |
Posted by thesweetcheat9th January 2017ce |
| Worlebury Camp was overgrown and unloved back in the mid-80's when I lived locally. Any perceived "anti-social behaviour" serves in fact as a KICK UP THE ARSE for the site to be either officially abandoned OR properly preserved. End of! |
Posted by tomatoman 10th January 2017ce |
| You must be logged in to add a comment | |
Top of page