British Archaeology banner

Cover of British Archaeology

Issue 75

March 2004

Contents

news

Ancient timbers found near South Yorkshire's oldest church

Mapping the Forest of Dean

Stonehenge Public Inquiry

Education Awards

New Light on Roman Rampart

In Brief

features

Who Owns Our Dead?
Vince Holyoak and Andy Saunders debate plane crashes

Corroded In Action
Excavating plane crash sites can bring special rewards

Archaeology At Sea
George Lambrick goes to sea

Heathrow Today, Tomorrow The World
Mike Pitts finds dramatic archaeology at Heathrow

Home and Heritage
Lynne Walker describes a battle won to preserve local homes

Yorkshire's Holy Secret
Jan Harding and Ben Johnson reflect on 10 years’ fieldwork

Bone People
Terry O’Connor’s quick guide to recognising human bones

letters

Piltdown, Orwell, Roman villas and hetrosexual values

opinion

Sue Beasley is not impressed by treasure

spoilheap

Neil Mortimer fails psychic link-up with Medieval Wales

books

Britain BC. Life in Britain & Ireland before the Romans by Francis Pryor

Pompeii. A Novel by Robert Harris

Anglo-Saxon Crafts by Kevin Leahy

Viking Weapons & Warfare by J Kim Siddorn

Glastonbury: Myth & Archaeology by Philip Rahtz & Lorna Watts

The Port of Medieval London by Gustav Milne

The City by the Pool by Michael J Jones, David Stocker & Alan Vince

Revealing the Buried Past by Chris Gaffney & John Gater

Essex Past & Present by Essex County Council

Seven Ages of Britain by Justin Pollard

The Complete Roman Army by Adrian Goldsworthy

Tracks & Traces: the Archaeology of the Channel Tunnel by Rail Link

CBA update

tv in ba

Angela Pinccini introduces a new review feature.

 

ISSN 1357-4442

Editor Mike Pitts

X-filed fossils

From Graham Mullan

I read with interest ‘Piltdown: Time to Stop the Slurs’ (January). The hoax should be thought of as the Piltdown ‘Forgeries’, 42 pieces of bone and flint probably fashioned at different times. The canine tooth was treated completely unlike the other bones and teeth: this important part of the story is one of only four objects not found by Dawson or Smith Woodward. The bone implement is also quite unlike the rest of the assemblage. It is the only object that does not fit with then current archaeological thinking. It is easier to envisage a separate genesis and purpose for these two items.

Yours sincerely,
Graham Mullan
graham.mullan@wotcc.org.uk

From David Padgham

I suggest ‘CFEB’ was C F Baxter of Lewes, member of the Sussex Archaeological Society and probable partner of local solicitors Wynne Baxter & Son, whose founder was a contemporary of Dawson.

Yours sincerely,
David Padgham
St Leonards-on-Sea

From Miles Russell

‘CFEB’ was either Robert Downes, a Birmingham University graduate who was writing a book, never published, on Dawson 1953-56 (much of what CFEB says is word for word Downes’ manuscript)—though why use a pseudonym and not be published as ‘RD’?—or a local writer who had spoken with Downes. There were plenty of people in Sussex who thought they knew ‘the truth’ about Piltdown, but who could never publicly say anything given the pre-eminent level of scientists who had backed Dawson’s ‘discovery’. It is a little annoying that, given the mass of data demonstrating Dawson was a great antiquarian fraud and serial hoaxer, so many continue to prolong the conspiracy theory. I suppose that’s the legacy of the X-Files. I agree it’s time for the slurs to stop!

Yours sincerely,
Miles Russell
Bournemouth University


Roman routes

From Simon James

Peter Ellis’s swipe at Romanists (January) may have been tongue in cheek, but I give it a loud raspberry because it perpetuates damaging stereotypes, and is plain wrong. Why, many of us Romanists are under 50 and sold our Vauxhalls years ago; a lot know all about phenomenology, and are yet to start greying at all. I, and others, venture into Iron Age studies too, and welcome it when prehistorians can be tempted into the Roman period. Peter is right about one thing: we face a real problem in public misconceptions about ‘civilized’ Romans and ‘primitive’ Britons. The uninformed prejudices of other archaeologists just make this task even more difficult!

Yours sincerely,
Simon James (Nissan driver)
Leicester University

From Martin Pitts

There does exist an underclass of Romanists who think (and dress) very differently. However, the latter community is straining to be heard outside the confines of TRAC (Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference). I’m 23 (rarely wear tweed and never driven a Vauxhall), and my doctoral research is concerned with the practice of feasting and the deposition of pottery in the prehistoric to Roman transition. Preliminary results indicate a diversity of practices not easily explained by the current orthodoxy.

Yours sincerely,
Martin Pitts
York University


Orwell the populariser

From Peter Davidson

My attention has been drawn to a rather silly piece in your journal (‘Archaeologist fingered by Orwell’, November). The Foreign Office [in 1949] was not seeking ‘anti-communist propagandists’. They needed people who might reliably write to counter anti-British propaganda disseminated by the Soviets, especially at the United Nations. They also needed to know who not to ask to write on behalf of the British Government. It was not a question of Childe being ‘anti-establishment’. If that were the issue, why should Orwell have asked him (and Crowther) to broadcast to India? Further, he published Childe’s ‘Science and Magic’ in a collection of broadcasts, Talking to India. In his initial list, Orwell indicated his doubts as to whether Childe was seriously ‘unreliable’ by including a question-mark. When he sent his name to Celia Kirwan he made that two question-marks.

As for ‘mere “scientific popularisers”’ – well, really! What the hell was Orwell doing if he was not popularising science – and literature, and drama, and psychology – if it were not through the series of broadcast talks that he organised for India? He pointed out that these men were successful popularisers because they had a gift for instructing and influencing ordinary people. The trouble was that they, like Bernal, could not be relied upon. Orwell admired J B Priestley and was very angry when ‘the establishment’ pushed him off the BBC. He had a great gift for talking to ordinary people. I was greatly influenced by his wartime broadcasts and by They Came to a City. But, and it is a very big BUT: Priestley was totally taken in by the Soviets. In this instance, he had got it wrong and Orwell had got it right (see Vol XX of my Complete Works of George Orwell, 2nd ed, pp 318-27).

Yours sincerely,
Peter Davidson
Marlborough

We were reporting press comments, and agree that Orwell would have approved of ‘popularisers’


Villa bodgery

From Tony Rook

I was told that most of the things at Butser’s new ‘Roman villa’ (Letters, January) about which I felt reservations were the responsibility of a planning officer concerned with appearance and building regulations. I studied the plans of about 120 domestic bath-houses in Roman Britain. They were all different. The villas which they served, perhaps, did not offer quite the same scope for eccentric bodgery as the baths, but they were free of building regulations and interfering planning officers. Apart from its incredible roof, perhaps Butser’s seaside bungalow might not have looked out of place after all.

Yours sincerely,
Tony Rook
Roman Building Trust


My kingdom for a couch

From Michael R Ulyatt

Ron Wilcox referred to the Stonehenge hokum recently delivered by Channel 5 (Letters, November). Mr Wilcox and others like him should climb down from their high horses and if not happy with a programme switch channels or switch off. At least there is some exposure to British history which is not compulsory in this country after the age of 14, and until that gross deficiency is corrected anything offered has to be considered positively. For me, I will be pulling up a bigger couch, switching on my television and enjoying soaking up the ‘hokum’. After all, I may be in good company, if not now then at some time in the future.

Yours sincerely,
Michael R Ulyatt
Mansfield

From Peter Davies

Most TV programmes are reviewed by experts in the medium more concerned with how the ‘air time’ was filled than with the technical accuracy or presentation of the content. I hear you are to start a TV review column. Go for it! I look forward to being able to ‘get even’ with some of my past tutors (who have appeared on The Box) who slagged-off some of my brilliant essays!

Yours sincerely,
Peter Davies
PeterWDavies01@aol.com


Androcentric values, man

From Hannah Cobb

The implications of the language used in archaeological literature operate on more dimensions than suggested by Peter Ellis (November). The use of the masculine pronoun to mean all of society is ambiguous and confusing. Additionally, such use suggests that social groups may be subsumed under and can be defined and entirely represented by the male form. The roots of this tradition lie with the western, heterosexual androcentric values of the 19th century prescriptive grammar movement.

In the reflexive, interpretive theoretical paradigm that prevails within modern British archaeology, this reflexivity and scrutiny of our own part within the interpretation of the past should apply at all levels. Thanks for publishing the article! It’s always great to read something that makes you feel heated about your subject!

Yours sincerely,
Hannah Cobb
Manchester University


Any jobs?

From Barry Atkinson

I am completing an MA in Field Archaeology at King Alfred’s College Winchester. My dissertation is on standing buildings in Hampshire. I am keen to pursue a career in any aspect of the preservation, renovation and restoration of historic buildings. However I have for the past four years spent most of my time cleaning hospital wards. Is there any hope that the recommendations outlined in the document Power of Place will ever see the light of day, and give me a chance to work in my chosen profession?

Yours sincerely,
Barry Atkinson
Winchester


Essential letters

From Mark Ryan

I understand that you do not exclusively cover British archaeology, but was there a need to highlight little known rock art from a culture entirely different to anything likely to be encountered in the UK? (‘Colourful Past’, November). The illustration of the techniques was a suitable companion article to the ‘Stonehenge Laser Show’, but is similar more pertinent work not being undertaken within our islands?

Yours sincerely,
Mark Ryan
Christchurch

From Melissa Johnson

I would like to see the News section expanded, and areas other than university-led research in the features, such as museums or amateur fieldwork. Opinions need not always be written by the same person. Book reviews could be shorter and cover more books. Letters I consider to be essential.

Yours sincerely,
Melissa Johnson
Edinburgh


We welcome letters from readers. They may be emailed to the Editor at editor@britarch.ac.uk or faxed to 01584 823461. They may be edited.

CBA web:

British Archaeology

Jan/Feb 2005
Mar/Apr 2005
May/Jun 2005
Jul/Aug 2005
Sep/Oct 2005
Nov/Dec 2005
Jan/Feb 2006
Mar/Apr 2006
May/Jun 2006
Jul/Aug 2006
Sep/Oct 2006
Nov/Dec 2006
Jan/Feb 2007
Mar/Apr 2007
May/Jun 2007
Jul/Aug 2007
Sep/Oct 2007
Nov/Dec 2007
Jan/Feb 2008
Mar/Apr 2008
May/Jun 2008
Jul/Aug 2008
Sep/Oct 2008
Nov/Dec 2008
Jan/Feb 2009
Mar/Apr 2009
May/Jun 2009
Jul/Aug 2009
Sep/Oct 2009
Nov/Dec 2009
Jan/Feb 2010
Mar/Apr 2010
May/Jun 2010
Jul/Aug 2010
Sep/Oct 2010
Nov/Dec 2010
Jan/Feb 2011
Mar/Apr 2011
May/Jun 2011
Jul/Aug 2011
Sep/Oct 2011
Nov/Dec 2011
Jan/Feb 2012
Mar/Apr 2012

CBA Briefing

Fieldwork
Conferences
Noticeboard
Courses & lectures
CBA Network
Grants & awards

CBA homepage