From Mr E Rothwell Hughes
Sir: May I add a postscript to reinforce Francis Pryor's comments in
`Urban diggers and rural prehistory' (April)? Some eight years ago
I attended a lecture on some topic in archaeology which dealt with the very latest theories, delivered
by a younger and I must admit a more `with-it' lecturer than I. His lecture was liberally sprinkled with
the latest jargon and like Francis Pryor I felt he was somewhat remote from the countryside roots of
our ancestors. I, too, fell asleep.
That afternoon, escaping from academia, I was out in the field, planning an archaeological field trip
visiting the wellknown sites of the Holyhead `Celtic' hut-circles, the Din Lligwy native settlement, and
ending at Penmon Priory and St Seiriol's Well, all on Anglesey. Whilst enjoying a quiet cigar at the
peaceful site of the well I was amazed to be greeted by my neighbour, an old Welsh bachelor farmer
who lived some ten miles from the well. He was wearing his best suit. To my knowledge he only
wore this suit at christenings, weddings and funerals. He proceeded to the well and quietly dropped a
pin into it. This particular well was not normally associated with pins although many others in the area
were.
After engaging in small talk I tackled him in Welsh: `I thought you were a Christian, William, but I
have just seen you do a very Pagan thing.'
After a considered pause, he answered: `I am a Christian but I really did it for my animals. ' It was
fertile spring-time.
`But why did you do it, William? ' `Well, I'll tell you, my father and grandfather did it although it
was at . . . ' (naming a well associated with pins but long blocked up) ` . . . so I come here'.
We continued our conversation but the matter of the pin obviously remained on his mind. Just before
we parted he placed his hand on my elbow, and said: `I'll tell you why I did it. I know about the old
gods - my father told me. I am a Christian, but I did it just in case.'
A dimly flickering flame of continuity at the end of the 20th century, totally removed from the lecture
theatre and the jargon of the morning. William, in his late 80s, with the aid of two walking sticks, still
tends his animals, and the lecturer received his promotion and recognition. They will never meet each
other. I still smoke my cigar.
Yours sincerely,
From Ms Millicent Tant
Sir: It must surely only be a matter of time before Farmer Pryor's rural idyll, presumably some
unkempt and smelly farm with a few novelty sheep and a rubber duck, is besieged by the producers
and researchers of `Down Your Way' and `One Man and His Dog'. This should provide the Sage of
the Fens with further opportunities to pontificate about the true meaning of life and to rail against
townies, contract archaeologists and theoreticians.
Now that the precedent has been set, can we expect to see regular `essays' from other bearded,
opinionated bores, or will BA return to printing Simon Denison's witty and pithy
deconstructions of the largely self-styled Greats of British Archaeology?
Yours sincerely,
From Mr John Pugh-Smith & Mr John Samuels
Sir: We are grateful that you considered our book Archaeology in Law worth reviewing
(`Archaeology, law, and sins of omission', April).
However, whilst we accept that a good reviewer carries a critical responsibility, we wish that you had
chosen one more au fait with the current legislation, its methods of operation, and one who had
read the book a little more thoroughly.
Your reviewer, Jane Grenville, is concerned that we failed to refer to the Field Monuments Act 1972.
However, she should have been aware that the whole act was repealed by Schedule 5 of the Ancient
Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. She also berates us for failing to state from whom
one obtains an ecclesiastical faculty. This information is clearly stated on pages 59 and 89, that the
power is vested in the diocesan bishop but is usually exercised by the chancellor of the diocese as
judge of the consistory court. Presumably it is not beyond the intelligence of the reader thereafter to
consult the telephone directory for the address of the relevant diocesan office.
We are also criticised over our select bibliography including the omission of a minor work on town
and country planning. As part of the sources from which the text has been drawn, the reader's
attention is drawn on several occasions to the leading practitioner's text, the Encyclopedia of
Planning Law and Practice, as well as to the highly regarded student work Outline of Planning
Law by Sir Desmond Heap.
Listed buildings, Jane Grenville notes, are specifically not covered by this book. Reference is made, to
this effect, to the companion volume, Listed Buildings by Suddards and Hargreaves.
Accordingly, it is hardly surprising that our chapter entitled `Fiscal Considerations' omits any
reference to the VAT arrangements for listed buildings.
Yours sincerely,
From Mr David Bevan
Sir: I should like to correct the impression given in your piece,
`Fears over archaeology's deterioration' (April), that the
conservation service in Bedfordshire has been disbanded and, therefore, that no conservation advice is
available in the county. The impact of local government reorganisation on conservation services in
Bedfordshire has been severe, as it has for all county council services. Posts have been lost and
budgets have been cut. However, while the conservation services are under pressure, and there will
undoubtedly be reductions in the range of work they can undertake, they still exist, and will continue
to perform their role in protecting and managing the historic heritage of the county.
Yours sincerely
From Mr Peter Davies
Sir: Is it not time (to use military language) to husband the reducing archaeological capability by
issuing a clear mission statement and unambiguous rules of engagement? By this means all
archaeologists will be made aware of the aims and priorities. The priorities will depend on variations
in funding, but unless archaeology gets its wagons in a circle pretty quickly then the hostiles
(politicians, budgeteers, and the rest) will be within and able to pick off feuding sub-sets with some
ease.
Yours faithfully,
Return to the British Archaeology homepage
© Council for British Archaeology, 1997
Rural archaeology
E ROTHWELL HUGHES
University of Wales, Bangor
12 April
MILLICENT TANT
Birmingham
5 May
A legal riposte
JOHN PUGH-SMITH
JOHN SAMUELS
London EC4
28 April
Into the future
DAVID BEVAN
Bedfordshire County Council
11 April
PETER DAVIES
Reading
10 April