7 ms·
‘Stunning’ Anglo-Saxon burial site found along HS2 route
- superb-owl 4y agoSerious question: at what point does grave robbing become archaeology? I'll be irked if someone 1000 years from now unearths my carefully lain grave, inspects its contents, and picks apart my bones. The typical response is "you'll be dead, what do you care" but I think that's trivializing a lot of deeply held feelings.
- dagw 4y agoSerious question: at what point does grave robbing become archaeology? Serious answer: When you are doing it for research, have been given permission from the relevant local authorities and turn over everything you find to the relevant authorities rather than keeping it for yourself.
- zarzavat 4y agoI suspect you’re in the minority. Most people would be thrilled if in 1000 years people were still talking them, even if it’s only because of the bling they were buried with.
- trhway 4y agoMake sure that a note to that effect is placed in your grave.
- mikro2nd 4y ago"Piss off! I'm only resting."
- doctor_eval 4y ago"I'm pining for the fjords!"
- gerdesj 4y agoI aint'd dead.
- jacquesm 4y agoWell, technically that is what the various ancient greats tried to achieve: that graverobbers would be so terrified they'd skip that grave and the ones that persisted ended up being given the Indiana Jones treatment. Not that it mattered, eventually you run out of traps and there are always more grave robbers. So in the long run it all gets found and that's before nature has its way with the environment where your gravesite is located. Personally, I'll go for cremation, the idea to continue to occupy a plot of land after I'm dead sounds pretty selfish.
- Ekaros 4y agoHow well did that work for ancient Egyptians? The future generations are bound to desecrate any grave eventually. They always have and always will.
- gonzo41 4y agoGet buried in a pine wood box, you'll be gone in < 100 years. Plant a tree ontop and create something productive in your later years.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y agoThat seems to be the way to go. I used to want to be cremated but now that seems ridiculous given that I'd be ending my existence with yet another display of extravagant and pointless waste, so a pine box where I can return to the earth with the least amount of fuss is really appealing.
- AlotOfReading 4y agoYou're welcome to whatever opinion you have, but as an archaeologist cremation or not doesn't really change the amount of fuss given to the dead. I've excavated huge burial mounds with both. The cremated remains are usually a lot easier to deal with though.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y agoI just meant from an environmental point of view, not a "digging me back up" angle.
- gonzo41 4y agoThis is my primary concern, I would rather sequester carbon as a tree than contribute it in particulate via cremation. Disclaimer, if my next tree self burns down that's on the tree and not me :)
- SketchySeaBeast 4y agoNot to mention that you're depriving nature of any nutrients you are holding. You're jealously burning your wealth to ensure that no one else can have it.
- 4y ago
- danparsonson 4y agoFor myself, as someone of no special significance, I hope to find some little out of the way burial site, and arrange to be buried with as much finery as I can afford at my allotted time, in the fond hope that some archaeologist will unearth the site 1000 years hence and assume that I was an important figure and those buried around me were my subjects :-)
- CalRobert 4y agoThe line is pretty blurry at times. Some universities have been terrible about meeting NAGPRA requirements to return human remains, for one thing. In the early 20th century, a Catalina Island newspaper described grave robbing as a fun day out for the family. On the other hand, plenty of rich dudes in the 1800's tried to give it more credibility even if they were doing much the same.
- OscarCunningham 4y agoThey're digging them up anyway for the train line, so the archaeology doesn't really cause any additional problem.
- rlpb 4y agoI don't think you have a right to claim some piece of land for eternity, at the expense of future people who want to use that space to live in (or for their infrastructure). So if your grave can't just remain there, what's the alternative? Do you just want it destroyed without inspection?
- treis 4y agoMoved and interred in a more convenient location?
- rlpb 4y agoThe body would still be claiming some piece of land for eternity; just somewhere else. This would still break my "no claim on land for eternity" requirement.
- treis 4y agoPerhaps this is semantics, but you're not placing a claim on a piece of land for eternity. You're placing a claim on any piece of land. And it's not for eternity. It's for so long as the land is not otherwise used or until geologic forces make it irrelevant.
- AlotOfReading 4y agoPeople forget where burial grounds are all the time and the first reminder is when a backhoe goes through a grave. Best case, they call an archaeologist to figure out if there are any more and to relocate what's left.
- jstanley 4y agoDo you think everyone who ever died should have a claim over the land they're buried in for the rest of all time? That seems obviously not workable.
- cardiffspaceman 4y agoDon't get me started on conservation of old buildings.
- Thorentis 4y agoWhy is it that we are allowed to unearth these remains, but when it comes to remains of e.g. native Americans, or Indigenous Australians or Canadians, there is a push to have them reburied? Seems like a double standard to me.
- DC-3 4y agoOne important reason is that the archaeologists excavating this site are by-and-large the direct ethnic descendants (and cultural inheritors) of the Anglo-Saxons, which is likely not the case for excavations in North America.
- mc32 4y agoWhat if the diggers are instead descendants of Celtic tribes, or Pictish or Jutes?
- dbingham 4y agoWell all of the various tribes merged together for the most part. Most people in the UK are probably descendants of multiple of those old tribes. Another difference is that in the UK there isn't nearly as much of a history of recent oppression of the decedents of the anglo-saxons the way there is a very recent and on going issue of oppression of the indigenous Americans and Australians. So there isn't the issue of the excavations being yet another example of an empowered people overriding the wishes of a dis-empowered people. To put it another way, a large majority of the indigenous people of the Americas have expressed a wish that their ancestors not be excavated. And that wish has been ignored time and time again until recently (though it frequently still is ignored). Here, no clear majority of the descendants have expressed such a wish, there's no history of it being overridden or ignored, and the excavators (for the most part) are descendants.
- mc32 4y agoTrue not recent. But the Angles and the Saxons had their lands taken away, their language subverted and were repressed by the Norsemen... So not "recent" but also not "ancient". Incidentally a group known as the "diggers" did seek some redress from their successors. In any event, bones are bones. I feel that after certain cut-off point, they become historical and are fair game for archeology. It's another story if it's an active or tended to graveyard --but if it's not known and is forgotten, then I think it's a fair archeological site.
- andyjohnson0 4y agoThe final paragraph: "Objects that have been unearthed will be preserved and many will eventually be displayed in museums. But larger finds will be bulldozed to make way for the new rail line." So much destruction and expense for what increasingly seems like a vanity project.
- kmlx 4y ago> So much destruction i don't want to be too philosophical about this, but: i love history and it's lessons, but at the same time i prefer the future. we tend to cling to the past, historical lessons, historical figures, but this usually hides our own insecurity about the future. i think there is a lot less to be learned from our past that can improve our future than many people believe. but we continue digging up our past, hoping to learn more about ancestors, when in fact we simply don't know the future, and this scares us. > what increasingly seems like a vanity project "climate change", "people working from home", "less cars", etc etc
- Singletoned 4y ago> "climate change", "people working from home", "less cars", etc etc https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hs2-will-never-be-carbon-neutral-in-120-year-lifespan-wk3s29pkl https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hs2-will-never-be-carbon-... It doesn't look as if HS2 will help towards climate change, even in the long run...
- mojzu 4y agoNot sure if the linked articles covers it due to the paywall, but according this article [1], the estimate that carbon emissions to build it would exceed emissions is possibly overly pessimistic. Such as predicting that air and car travel will get cheaper over time and rail travel more expensive Although if the estimate is accurate I would still hazard a guess that it could be a net positive if it successfully increased capacity/speed to the point where people considered it a viable alternative to air/car journies and it was combined with policies to reduce the costs of rail travel/discourage air and car travel where possible [1] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/02/will-hs2-really-help-cut-the-uks-carbon-footprint https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/02/will-hs2-rea...
- heurisko 4y agoIf you're interested in this, then you might be interested in "The Dig", a recent dramatisation of the discovery of the Anglo-Saxon burial treasures at Sutton Hoo. In addition to the discovery of the treasures themselves, the real-life story of the finders, Edith Pretty and Basil Brown, is also of interest.
- WilTimSon 4y agoWasn't it somewhat twisted around in the movie? I'm almost certain I read something about it being an inaccurate depiction of the events. Though I admit I enjoyed the film, nice trifle to put on for an evening in.
- nathancahill 4y agoSeems fairly accurate besides the romantic storylines Hollywood adds: https://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/the-dig/ https://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/the-dig/
- DeathArrow 4y ago>Dr Rachel Wood, the lead archaeologist for Fusion JV, the company that carried out the field work Is common in the UK for archeological work to be done by companies? In my country it is done only by state institutions.
- AlotOfReading 4y agoThe UK (and to a lesser extent the US) have robust private archaeology industries. It's a pretty well accepted career path, but not the only one. Government and academic positions still exist (and are usually more sought-after).
- chrisseaton 4y agoBecause the UK is small and congested and old, it has a lot of historical sites juxtaposed with modern development. Developers are required (by law or code or something not sure) to do archeological studies when developing, so they hire companies to do it for them. How does archaeology work where you live? Do you have to pay the government to come and do it for you?
- DeathArrow 4y ago>How does archaeology work where you live? Do you have to pay the government to come and do it for you I live in Romania. You do not have to pay. The reason companies are not allowed to do archeological work is because all artifacts belongs to the state by law, and because there is no legal framework to allow companies to do it. If you find something by accident in your yard or elsewhere, you have to give it.l and also report the location. After that some archeologists will come to verify if the place is an archeological site or not. If it is, depending on its importance, they can dig it up quick and discharge the site, or can stay for years and either expropriate you for a nice amount or offer you compensation for the time you couldn't use your property. Also, it's illegal to treasure hunt or use metal detectors unless you are legally registered. If you find anything of value, you have to give it but you get a reward of 10% of the evaluation.
- 4y ago
- Dave3of5 4y agoWas is promptly demolished to make way for the Tory partys' vanity project ?
- antihero 4y agoIt isn’t a tory vanity project, it’s a huge boost for our rail infrastructure which is unfortunately getting ever more weakened. In fact, if it wasn’t for HS2 we likely wouldn’t have found it.
- at_a_remove 4y agoHopefully their Minister of Culture won't order the artifacts be melted down into scrap, but who knows?
- Flatcircle 4y agoHow many years have to pass between respecting the burial sites of the dead and a scientific dig that unburies everything in the name of research? Not judging just asking a philosophical question.
- pestatije 4y agoSome people are never buried in the name of research.
- globalise83 4y agoWell, HS2 is going to destroy the burial site anyway so it makes sense to investigate before that happens.