[Stones] So, is this what some think of our heritage?

[Ric]

Hi,

i'm not a Wayland's buff and it's name does nothing
for me - i love it as a long barrow. in its unrestored
state it resembled a jumbled pile of rocks. we will
never know exactly how the monument looked four
millennia ago, but archaeology has revealed its
outline, stone socket holes and indeed the several
phases of its construction, and this data does seem to
have been fairly accurately followed to realise the
'Smithy' we see today

quite a few barrow stones seem to have been robbed in
antiquity, probably for peoples' gate posts and - as
at Avebury - for building material?

what i came away from the long barrow with was, the
terrible abuse being rained down upon the Ridgeway by
4x4's and scrambler-type motorcyclists. this ancient
track is an unmetalled bridleway and is being carved
up by motor traffic. you can't always blame these
people if there's no-one there to stop them. park on a
yellow line in Swindon and you get clamped (or worse);
chew up ancient pathways in the countryside with an
'off roader' and the authorities are looking the other
way ...

i love that barrow and i am endlesslessly greatful to
its restorers: can we have some more please?

;]

Ric


--- Thelma Wilcox <thelmawilcox at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Well to change the subject slightly Ric, I was at
> Wayland's Smithy yesterday, which was of course
> restored in the 1960's, and in An Arch.Guide, 1973
> (James Dyer), it looks somewhat different than it is
> today.  It seems, by the photo, to have had walling
> extending down the long flanks, and the kerbing
> stones seem somewhat different.  So the first
> restoration seems to have been superseded by a
> second later restoration.  As the photo is not too
> good it is difficult to interpret, but what does
> stand out is an exceptional uniform neatness, that
> it would not have necessarily had when it was first
> erected...Don't know if there is an report out there
> when it was originally done; apparently Atkinson
> excavated it 1962-63 - did he leave no stone
> untouched? ;)