A couple of days ago I linked on F/B Ken Williams (shadowandstone) excellent photographs of the exhibits at the Stonehenge Exhibition at the British Museum. Ken Williams is an Irish photographer who has recorded the prehistory of Ireland, especially Knowth in County Meath. Sadly I can't link the exhibition photos but they were wonderful, Jennie and an old friend from America commented on them. Bucky and Loie had planned to come over for this showpiece of prehistory, now finished of course. Unfortunately the friends they were coming over with were ill and they did not make it so he was pleased to see the photos.
But the point of why I mention this because I remember when we had taken Bucky and Loie to see Sea Henge timber in 2012 at the Lynn Museum, he had made a bit of fuss about the iron banding and small bits of wood that had been chain sawed out of the timbers, causing the museum staff to phone up presumably the archaeologists who had excavated the timbers. Here is what I wrote at the time.
Anyway this is a personal record to go in my blog, to remember good friends and a trip down to the Norfolk coast, again in cold weather.
The whole fascinating history of the finding and then conservation of these timbers can be found here in a wiki.
One more thing, my envy and admiration of all my blogger friends as to their wonderful photography I own up to, but just look at Ken Williams Grange Stone Circle in Ireland (and drool). This most perfect circle was made with something we all did as children, take a pencil and piece of string and form the perfect circle. This circle was probably drawn by a pole and a rope. Could well be a twisted honeysuckle rope, the same as the one found round the Seahenge timbers.
 |
| The large central upside down tree trunk, thought to be for 'sky burials' |
In our travel diary for our trip with you 2013, I
wrote After we returned, P~ sent us an email of the text he wanted to post on his Heritage blog: After a few backs and forths, his post read…
“On a recent visit to the Lynn Museum in Norfolk to see the Seahenge Gallery, it was noticed by our American friends, Bucky and Loie, that in each of the trunks that make up the circle there is a wedge-shaped cut extending the whole width of each trunk, and one or two inches into it. Bucky writes that, ‘Loie noticed a horizontal band of discoloration on one timber. When she pointed it out to me, I started looking at all of them and finding similar bands, at different heights. At first, I thought they might be strips of metal helping hold the timbers to the support posts: there was a tiny bit of space between some of the bands and the wood, as if the bands weren’t tight. Looking at the bands from as close to the timber sides as was possible, it was soon apparent the bands were not connected to the metal posts: light was visible between them. So the bands were in or on the wood. I soon saw that where the bands met the sides of the timbers, they continued around the sides. And the continuations were all triangular. It became apparent that the only explanation for all the different aspects we had noted would be horizontal wedges cut into the wood, and then inexpertly filled with some kind of painted putty.’
“The cuts had indeed been filled and in-painted so, in the subdued lighting of the Gallery, they are not easily seen (which actually contravenes accepted conservation practice as restorations should be clearly visible). Staff on the reception desk at Lynn Museum didn’t know what the cuts were (and hadn’t even noticed them before) but after telephoning one of the museum curators it appears that English Heritage’s original intention was to leave the circle in situ to naturally degrade. In order to get as much information as possible before that happened however a wedge was cut out of each timber (not just the infamous chainsaw chunk from the central bole) for dendochronological cross-dating. English Heritage’s decision to leave the circle in situ was then reversed and all the timbers were subsequently removed for safety and conservation (now unfortunately with slices taken out of them—slices which subsequently needed to be filled in and ‘restored’).
“Other observations at the Seahenge Gallery were that not all the timbers from the circle are on show—the rest are in storage at the Museum with no plans to bring them out for display. This is strange because there appears, actually, to be enough room in the Seahenge Gallery to display them all if things were rearranged. The large (and excellent) illuminated photo of the sea actually dissects the Gallery and if this were moved to a side wall the rest of the circle could probably be displayed (ingress and egress to and from the circle being made possible by having the two halves positioned slightly apart).
“What is really disappointing at Lynn Museum’s Seahenge Gallery is the position of the central bole; it stands in its own case outside the circle, against a wall (so one cannot walk round it) and next to a door which is often open and which reveals another gallery with some kind of fairground attraction in it - very disconcerting, not to mention distracting the visitor’s attention from the central bole and the rest of the Seahenge Gallery.
“The Heritage Trust would like to see all of the circle displayed, the bole repositioned within it, and the door to the other gallery either screened off or fitted with a self-closing mechanism. Other suggestions we would like to make are that the replica cast of the smaller bole is removed (it is not a cast of the Seahenge bole anyway but of another one) and a mirror fitted to the ceiling of the case in which the Seahenge bole itself stands (so that its top surface can be seen from below).
“Money to do these things is always a problem of course but perhaps an appeal could be launched to assist in fundraising. A dedicated collection box at the entrance to the Seahenge Gallery might be installed for this purpose. The collection box at the British Museum for example asks for a £5 donation from those who can afford it; a similar request at the Lynn Museum does not seem unreasonable given that it would help towards aiding the full, and proper, display of this unique monument from our ancient past.”
So, I was irritated by the poor display of the artifacts, in general, and Paul was incensed by the dendochronological slices.
That was a good trip!
I have never heard of the practice of removing wedges for the purpose of determining age. I've always understood that the tree is bored into with a hollow bit that removes a long 'plug' which can be used to count the growth rings. Wedges seem like they would be very damaging to the artifact.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I think Debby, archaeologists get too excited by their finds, when in actual fact, the care of said finds is more important. The timbers were soaked for many months down at the Fen centre and I suppose the need for money to build the display at Lynn Museum. There was quite a lot of controversy at the time when Seahenge was discovered. The local 'druids' were adamant against the removal of the timbers from the sand but a 'grown-up' decision had to be made I suppose to protect them.
ReplyDelete