What were the circumstances behind the challenge to Richard Kemp's (1987)
interpretation of a forge at Camp Mill (alas I do not have ready access to
PMA vols for '87 and '89)? Reassessment/reinterpretation guided by practical
fieldwork; or critical speculation/hearsay? Accepting that forge waste might
find its way into/onto non-ironworking pond bays etc, it still appears
reasonable to link a presumably reliable and long established waterpower
site, located within an historic iron making landscape, with a waterpowered
enterprise such as a forge. Reliable waterpower sites may, over time, host
divers industrial processes requiring a power source. Presumably Kemp
recovered archaeological evidence to support his interpretation? Do I assume
that the renewed interest in Camp Mill may herald the rehabitation/belated
acceptance of Kemp's forge interpretation?
Paul H Vigor.
----- Original Message -----
From: "paul courtney" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: Supposed Forge in Forest of Dean
> The site is Camp Mill, Soudley see original report in Post-med Archaeology
> 21(1987) by Richard kemp and reassessment in PMA 23 (1989) by David
Mullin.
>
> paul courtney
> Leicester
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter King" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 7:57 PM
> Subject: Supposed Forge in Forest of Dean
>
>
> > I have a recollection of an article having been published by some one
who
> > excavated a mill in the Forest of Dean and claimed it was a forge.
Having
> > been told that the author's interpretation was wrong I blocked his out
> from
> > my mind, but now need to refer to it. I can no longer remember the site
> > name or the author. Does any one else?
> >
> > Peter King
> > 49, Stourbridge Road,
> > Hagley
> > Stourbridge
> > West Midlands
> > DY9 0QS
> > Telephone 01562-720368
>
|