Seahenge: An Archaeological Conundrum by C. Watson - Book Report/Review Example

Book Review xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Review of the book Seahenge: An Archaeological Conundrum xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Name xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Tutor xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date Introduction Watson’s works are centered on the Holme a prehistoric monument that was located in the Holmes village which bordered the sea shores of the English county of Norfolk. The artifact dates its origin back to the ancient Neopegan historical society that claimed it had a spiritual relevance to them. It is estimated to have been built in the Bronze Age in the Britain. It is assumed to have been built for ritual purposes. Its design comprised of an outer ring that had fifty five oak trunks forming a circular enclosure. The artifact was named after Stonehenge which was a prehistoric structure that had its existence in Wiltshire. The excavations of the artifact brought mixed reactions from various groups with varying ideas. Watson’s narrative writing focuses on the artifacts discovery, its excavation and the controversies that surrounded its origin and purpose (Watson 2005). The book review In the first chapter of this book, Watson aims to bring to the understanding of the reader on the actual events that surrounded the discovery of the Seaheng. In his narration, the actual excavation of the Holme began in October 1998by the Norfolk Archeological Unit under the leadership of Mark Brennand. Prior to its excavation, the artifact was discovered by John Lorimer while on an expedition of catching shrimps n the company of his brother in law. John was a special needs worker who was also skilled and armature in the archeological field. The artifact was not easy to locate as the Bronze Age axe head was covered with silt. Watson records that John was not aware of what the artifact was and decided to get an opinion on it from a friend who was a metal detectorist. Upon the detection of what the artifact was the trio decided to contact the Norwich Castle museum who at first thought it was an Anglosaxon fishing trap. It was later confirmed that it was the second of the type to be excavated in the previous few months. Upon further observation, Watson reveals that the groups were able to realize that the excavation had manmade construction origin (BBC 2008). The second and proceeding chapter reveals the excavation processes. The English Heritage agreed to fund the excavation process. From Watson’s writing it is clear that the artifact had experienced massive erosion that was caused by the abrasive sea tides and the salty waters. The English Heritage had to fund the whole process as it was envisaged to be expensive. The third chapter focuses on the centers on the controversies that surrounded the excavation process the naming of the artifact. Watson reveals that from the onset, the excavation idea and activity were of low profile and had the privilege of being aired buy only the British Archeology Magazine and few Nolfork media outlets. The scenario shifted after the story was aired by The Independent. the excavation was published on the top page of the magazine and was written by the papers environmental correspondent. The heading given by the paper marked the beginning of the beginning of the artifact being likened and named after the historic namesake. the independent paper’s publishing of the story ignited publications from the other media houses who wrote a variety of articles on the excavation. The stories according to Watson’s narration marked the beginning of the monument being named by the name Seaheng (Watson 2005). The excavation was being likened to one of the most popular monuments among the national treasures of England. The fourth chapter gives a record of the controversies that surrounded the excavation of the monument. When the trial excavation is complete, English Heritage, which was funding the excavation process, finds itself facing a challenge because the already exposed timbers is at risk since the salt within the brines are attacking it and is at risk of being attacked by mollusks which bare wood and other marine microbes. The team wonders if it should preserve them on the site, or if should excavate them, or if it should just make a record and leave the monument alone without taking any further steps. Watson gives an explanation as to how the Norfolk landscape has changed. This area which has undergone enormous changes is presently an agricultural area. The techniques used in farming involve use of dykes together with wind pumps. This present state is a contrast of what was there when the first human beings occupied the land around 400, 000 BC. Initially, that land was covered with thick ice which was between 500, 000 -400, 000 years ago and is known as the Anglian ice age. The initial occupants of that area are assumed to have been hunters and gatherers who were nomadic and camped along the river valleys together with lake shores. This conclusion is arrived at after the discovery of knives, scrapers and axes which are all flint tools (Watson 2005). Many groups emerged to give their opinion as to where the artifact ought to be placed. Among them were the Neopegan and the New age who were perceived as the whole idea as an erosion of their religious culture. Based on this it can be assumed that the monument had a religious function among the people of England. Many persons had the respect for plants and viewed them as a special creation. Trees and plants to them had a spiritual ownership. The excavation of the monument to the Neopegan and New age was aimed at interruption of the culture and religious practices. They wanted the artifact to remain at situ as this could be assumed to be its final destination. From these illustrations it is clear that the monument had a religious significance to some groups in England (Pyror, F, 2001). Two other groups had contradicting ideas on the monument as some wanted it to remain there and act as a tourist attraction facility for people who will want to see it. This according to Watson they thought would bring in more revenue to the country. This was eventually refuted by the conservationists as the visitors who visited the had interfered with the ecosystem of the environment surrounding the sea which had been cordoned off to enable the effective breeding and keeping of the wider birds which until late had almost become extinct. all the groups had valid reasons for as the preservation of the monument will be able to generate income and preserve the culture while on the other hand the preservation to the wild animal species whose ecosystem had been interrupted with will not only generate income but be able to protect animals which have a vital role in the environment. it is however notably clear from Watson that the law firms were reluctant in taking up the case as they had little chances on winning a case against the English heritage, in addition, the firm banned most prominent protests from happening near the site by placing a banning injunction. The ban was however successfully contested by the Needham and Maughling as the court came to an agreement that neither of them had obstructed the work of the archeologists. The greatest protest was recorded when the young female protestor ran below the tree stump that was being pulled, this occurred as the excavators had planned to dig out the monument and transport it to a different site. Watson records that she was restrained by the police and the excavators but not before she caused a major scene that was speedily covered by the media houses that had been tipped off prior to the protest (Watson 2005). The excavated Holme timbers were taken to Flag Fen right after they were uncovered. This particular site of Flag Fen is unique and identified among the Bronze Age archaeological sites which were identified later. The writer points out that in 1982, using a ‘dragline’, a very old piece of timber was dug-up and using radiocarbon, it was identified to have been there since 1, 000 BC. Subsequent excavations have led to the discovery of a ritual landscape consisting of an alignment of timber exceeding one kilometer which had over 60,000 posts. Watson takes advantage of the advantages of visual images to be able to give the full idea of the excavation process. This aids in giving a clearer picture of the pieces excavated and the facilities used to clean and study these excavated pieces. The precise details of the timber cleaning process are given. These pieces of timber are said to have spent 4, 000 years in salt water and this made the cleaning process easier since when they are dipped in fresh water for cleaning, the pieces of clay on top fall off. Once the cleaning process is done, the pieces are taken into the study are where it is thoroughly examined. The details collected are used to aid in the detective work. Pictures showing the equipment used to measure the pieces are included which makes it easier to understand the process and also evaluate the kind of equipment used. Watson further explains how the long-term preservation process of the timbers of the monument was done. The monument timber was constantly sprayed with fresh wax and water. This was able to bring the timber back to almost its original state. The preservation and treatment of the monument’s timber was conducted the King’s Lynn Museum in 2008 (Watson 2005). In conclusion, Watson gives a chronological written narrative of the events that followed the discovery, excavation and preservation of the Seahenge. The historical origin of the monument is not however clear as he only gives assumptions as to where the monument is thought to have originated. Through his narration the evaluation process reveals the circle as not made up of posts but comprised of skillfully split timbers which were positioned in a way that they put up together thus making the circle stronger and giving it an appearance of some sort of a wooden wall. It is the effects of the sand which had led to the wearing off of the bark together with the soft outer parts of the wood thus leaving the harder part which is at the centre or heart of these timbers. The posts were 55 in number and are dated back 4, 000 years ago (BBC 2008). The team measured and studied the marks made on the timber by the axes that had been used to cut the trunks and these marks reveal a lot about the techniques used during the Bronze Age in cutting trees. Watson also includes some enriching section giving information on the Bronze Age. This information includes the estimated population then, their culture and other aspects of their lives. The time within which they were built and used is given; 1350-950 BC. There is also the description of the arrangements found within that particular area. Other artifacts made of bronze which have been found on the south of this timber palisade mentioned include swords, daggers, rapiers, ornamental pins, spearheads and parts of shields. The excavation of all these pieces has been done over time and it has been noted that study and excavation of that site still continues. Moreover, all the excavations done have led to building of several reconstructions used for Bronze and Iron Age roundhouses. Also a museum together with a heritage centre has been built. It is evident from his writing that many people viewed it with reverence as it had a spiritual significance to a population of the populous. the writer falls short of giving a conclusive narration to back up for the existence of the diverging views of the mode of preservation of the monument as it is not clear from the book as to why the English Heritage decided to have the monument preserved at the King’s Lynn Museum. References Watson, C, 2005, Seahenge: An Archaeological Conundrum. Swindon: English Heritage. ISBN 1850748969 Pyror, F, 2001, Seahenge: New Discoveries in Pre-historic Britain, Harper and Collins, London. BBC, 2008, Ancient Seahenge ‘return home’ Viewed on the 10th of May from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/7312429.stm Read More