Hi Janet,
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 01:07:30 +0100 Janet Kaiser
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Well, well, well. I find this a fascinating
> turnabout. Not long ago, a request for
> information on unknown or little used wells and
> water sources in Ireland from someone wanting to
> visit new sites (I think from the Netherlands)
> was treated with distrust and soul searching.
As i remember, this chap wrote to Katy? first and she
passed it on to the list. He did not introduce himself and
did not say much about his reasons for wanting to find a
quiet and remote place. The request did seem suspicious,
particularly because it came at a time when we were being
warned about thefts of statues etc from holy wells.
He made no mention of being a "well-known author" or a
"water venerator". If he had then no doubt his request
would have been met with more open-mindedness. This is a
failing of the email system in that it is difficult to
make judgements beyond the words on the screen.
In view of the above i think it is safest to be suspicious
under the circumstances. After all, there are a number of
books written on the subject that he could have consulted.
And holy wells are marked on the OS Discovery maps.
I would also question just how much knowledge of Irish
wells was on the list at that time. Certainly, it was
before i had been there.
> Is this an advanced case of
> dog-in-the-mangerism? No one cares for them, but
> they are not going to give others the
> opportunity of finding them? Certainly not
> foreigners!
Oh come now! Surely you are not suggesting xenophobia on
the list.
> And someone making the effort to search
> out sites by subscribing to this list must have
> some good intention, not just mindless
> destruction in mind.
Not mindless destruction, no. But if somebody was
interested in stealing artefacts then why not get some
expert knowledge. If you doubt this is happening then i can
think of a number of instances of Pictish stones,
Sheela-na-Gigs, carved heads, or just plain sarsen stones
from the Avebury area being stolen in recent years. Better
to be safe than sorry surely?
> Hopefully this current discussion shows a change
> of heart.
I don't think there is a closed-minded opinion to change
here. Certainly whenever i have asked for information from
the list i have been overwhelmed with information.
But this does bring up an interesting discussion that i
have had a number of times in the past with people on the
Stones List. Just how much info should be made available
about sites. Personally, i have no qualms with making the
info available to whomever, but others i know many of whom
are site-guardians would prefer to be more selective with
the information they give because they have seen the
wanton vandalism etc that can and does occur. Certainly, we
all have a responsibility to the sites we visit and study,
but a balance between being protective and sharing
information is necessary.
Just how much info should we make available do you think?
Should i include directions and grid refs on my web pages?
Cheers,
Rich (the suddenly verbose character who will respond to
any emails because of intense work-related boredom :-)
----------------------
Rich Pederick
[log in to unmask]
----------------------
Living Spring Journal - THE International Electronic
Forum for Research into Holy Wells & Waterlore
http://www.bath.ac.uk/lispring/journal/front.htm
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|