When Silbury is tunnelled

Silbury Hill 180

Image by treaclechops

Littlestone May 30, 2005 23:46:10

Nigel wrote...

>When Silbury is tunnelled and Thornborough is quarried I'm sure you (refering to smallblueplanet) and your dedicated passionate friends will rationalise it and move on...<

Some of you will know by now that I'm a conservator (have been for nearly forty years) and I've watched with sadness as the debate over the future of Silbury has raged this way and that on these pages and elsewhere. Perhaps, as a conservator, I should have said something before now but to be honest I know next to nothing about the conservation of ancient monuments. However, there are certain rules in conservation (the most important of which is a bit like the Hippocratic Oath) that must be observed and must never, never be broken or compromised; it is from the platform of that rule that I offer the following.

The first and most important rule in conservation is the one that says that any treatment to an object, whether that object be an oil painting, a marble statue, a castle or a temple, must take nothing away from the original and must be completely reversible. In the case of Silbury, the idea of cutting a new tunnel, or changing anything that would destroy part of its original structure, is completely and utterly unacceptable from a conservation standpoint. I repeat, completely and utterly unacceptable. There is no way around that rule and those of you who are fighting against the bureaucratic incompetence of those who should know better must quote it at each an every opportunity. Further, for what it's worth, you are not standing alone; behind you are the thousands of members of the International Institute for Conservation of Historic Works who are scattered across the globe and who are working day and night to save mankind's cultural heritage from loss and destruction. There are also the hundreds of conservators belonging to the United Kingdom Institute for Conservation and other similar conservation bodies both here and abroad; I doubt if a single member of any of those bodies would condone the cutting of a new tunnel at Silbury - not a single member.

I'm afraid I do not know enough about the politics behind the decisions being made about the future of Silbury and in a way I do not need to know. All I need is for someone from English Heritage, Heritage Action or any other body to furnish me with indisputable evidence that there are definite plans to contravene this first rule of conservation and I promise I will pull out every stop that I know of to prevent that miscarriage of conservation taking place.

Meanwhile, may I add that I have the utmost respect for everyone, both here and elsewhere, who is passionate about the future of Silbury, Thornborough and other places under threat. But may I also add that we do nothing at all to help save those places by squabbling amongst ourselves.

Littlestone

Fellow of the International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artist Works.

smallblueplanet May 31, 2005 09:05:39

Replying to Littlestone

Out of interest (not a wind up whatever others may think) which bits of Silbury would you and wouldn't you conserve though? Afterall the Atkinson and other tunnel are now part of its history. Or are you looking to put it into "aspic"?

nigelswift May 31, 2005 12:22:35

Replying to Littlestone

Littlestone, thank you for that. Ironically, your bete noire, "irreversibility", was one of the reasons EH rejected grouting at an early stage, whereas they have expressed no such objections to tunnelling!

It's a sad fact that all options are going to be irreversible. However, your yardstick is still perfectly valid: a small amount of irreversible intervention is preferable to a large amount. On the basis of what's so far been published, that entirely rules out tunnelling in favour of either grouting or leaving it alone. It'll need some remarkable paperwork to prove otherwise.

You ask: are there "definite plans" to tunnel?
All I can do is say that's how the wind seems to be blowing – and to point you to the evidence: the widespread published enthusiasm for the research opportunities that tunnelling alone would bring, the assertion that EH has a "moral duty" to re-tunnel in order to correct Atkinson's omissions and the fact that the Committee has plainly said tunnelling is "preferable".

Is this enough for "the hundreds of conservators belonging to the United Kingdom Institute for Conservation" to start to raise their voices publicly? My feeling is that it is now, not when a plan is formalised, that their voices are most needed and effective. The matter is still open for debate and will be much harder to influence later. I feel the same way about archaeologists in general. I'm sure vast numbers of them will stand up and be counted in public when the time comes, and know that many are already supportive privately, but isn't it now that the alarm bells should be rung?

Pilgrim May 31, 2005 13:05:52

Replying to Littlestone

Littlestone,
A fine piece of writing, and one that gives me hope that the poor bloody hill will have some representation, and thus cause for optimism. As PeterH says:

"archaeologists' top priorities are the search for knowledge and the consequent enhancement of their reputations."

The only way for an academic to justify themselves is in the production of papers - end product to testify that they have been doing the work they were paid for (usually via the public purse!), and thus are bound to have a stilted view of what is best in a given situation.
I am - as Nigelswift so eloquently states, one of the "untutored public, the true owners of the monument" and I believe that people like yourself and organisations like Heritage Action are to be applauded and supported wholeheartedly.

This is me, saying to English Heritage:
"Don't be so ruddy daft."

Peace

Pilgrim

mike croley May 31, 2005 18:07:19

Replying to Littlestone

I believe that a red Crystal Skull sits within Silbury Hill but, in a higher dimension. As the 'Quickening' really starts to kick in,it will appear before our eyes in this dimension. They need a tunnel for access when this happens.

mike

Littlestone May 31, 2005 21:41:59

Replying to Littlestone

Dear Julian

You may not read this post but I thought I'd write it anyway... just in case.

There's no doubt in my mind that you are as concerned about Silbury as most of us here. Having said that, you might feel, as some of us also feel, that there's so much information, misinformation, suggestions, proposals and counter proposals about Silbury's future that a kind of inertia sets in and you almost hope someone else will sort it out. Perhaps someone else will sort it out but I've got a horrible feeling that they wont, and this wonderful enigmatic structure we call Silbury will crumble and fall before its time. So, and I'm really trying to keep this short and simple, what do we do?

I was making my usual cup of coffee about 10:30 this morning when I picked up a news report about Bob Geldof's forthcoming Live 8 Concert. Bob is reported as saying...

"Once more into the breach. What started 20 years ago is coming to a political point in a few weeks. There is more than a chance that the boys and girls with guitars finally get to tilt the world on its axis. What we do in the next five weeks is seriously, properly, historically, politically important."

I stirred my coffee, took a sip, smiled and thought of Silbury. What we do for Silbury in the next few weeks or months is indeed seriously, properly, and historically important and, if Bob can do it for his cause, we can do it for ours. So, how about a Concert to Save Silbury? Plenty of music, a few guest speakers, a poetry reading perhaps, all mixed in with the ideas that others will certainly have. I may be able to pull in a few luminaries from the world of conservation if you can organize a venue. What about it? Let's 'tilt the world our way' for a change and see if we can't save this Old Lady of the Downs for a little while longer.

Sincerely

Littlestone

nigelswift May 31, 2005 23:28:14

Replying to Littlestone

Littlestone,
Never mind the diversion, your suggestion is superb.

VenerableBottyBurp Jun 1, 2005 11:21:29

Replying to Littlestone

The issues at Thornborough are clear, that is not the case with Silbury.

What are you trying to achieve ?

Save Silbury - from who or what ?

If you want the hill to stay as it is now and nothing be done until the wider public are aware of the situation and can debate and have a say then make this clear.

If not this what do you want - do you want to stop the rebore of the tunnels - what ?

VBB

goffik Jun 4, 2005 21:04:05

Replying to Littlestone

Funny, innit?

The people that say "stay off the hill" are the ones that think a fucking great hole tunnelled into it is a good idea!

Jesus there's some fucked up people here... So very bitter... Petty...

There's some very sensible suggestions going around here, but they seem to get swamped by all the fucking TROLLS!

This forum being overrun by them! People I never considered trolls before have started trolling! Is it fun? Probably when you're about 15 years old... Get a life.

G x