Do all battles happen in fields? Surely it should be Battle SITE or SITE
OF!!!
-----Original Message-----
From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of THOMAS, Roger M
Sent: 13 July 2006 10:26
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Fires, Sources and Monuments
I'm glad that Phil and I agree on fires, but we may disagree on battlefields!
Unless there is physical evidence (defences, musket balls, whatever, it is
the historical record of a battle which changes our perception of the field,
not the fact of the battle itself. There may be (probably are) lots of
battles which we know nothing about (e.g. ones that may have occurred in
prehistoric times) and the places where those occurred are still just fields
(or whatever) to us. So it's the documentary record, not the historical event
itself, which results in the definition. Which is why a separate table for
that kind seems sensible.
This has cropped up with UADs. There's a world of difference between saying
'there is historical evidence for a tenement on this site in the 14th cent'
and 'there are the remains of a 14th cent tenement on this site'. The chains
of evidence and reasoning which lead to those two statements are completely
different from each other. Not recognising that difference can lead one into
problems.
(I think the problem with battlefields is that, because we have a Register of
them, we feel we need to put them in HERs along with SAMs, LBs etc. But I
don't think they're the same!).
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of CARLISLE, Phil
Sent: 13 July 2006 09:51
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Fires, Sources and Monuments
I must agree with Roger on this. I think that an 'associated historic events'
record which could be linked to one or more monuments makes more sense than
misleading the public into believing that 'Great fire of London' is a
monument. Indeed if we look at the Monument in London which commemorates the
Great Fire, this would have a record with Monument Type
- 'Commemorative Monument' and Associated Historical Event - Great Fire of
London.
If the house in pudding lane was still around this too could be linked to the
same event.
I think Battlefields are slightly different to fires inasmuch as they are
Monument Type - field before the battle but during it and ever after they
become monument type - battlefield. The field itself may not have changed
drastically but the event changed our perception of what it is.
With a fire the monument types are buildings beforehand but afterwards may
just be a layer of burnt earth or ash or if we're lucky 'Fire-damaged
Buildings'. This is a drastic change but fire-damaged buildings don't stay
fire-damaged for long as they are either restored to their former glory or
demolished so to have a term such as fire-damaged building or burnt deposits,
as a monument type, is to my mind wrong.
Burnt deposits are 'evidence' of a fire event not monuments.
I'm rambling now so I think I'll shut up
Phil Carlisle
Data Standards Supervisor
National Monuments Record Centre
Kemble Drive
Swindon
SN2 2GZ
+44 (0)1793 414824
The information contained within this e-mail is confidential and may be
privileged. It is intended for the addressee only. If you have received the
e-mail in error, please inform the sender and delete it from your system. The
contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed to anyone else or copied
without the sender's consent.
Any views and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
do not necessarily reflect those of English Heritage. English Heritage will
not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
-----Original Message-----
From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of THOMAS, Roger M
Sent: 13 July 2006 09:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Fires, Sources and Monuments
Dear all
If we end up in the position where we refer to the Great Fire of London as a
'monument', it may (possibly) make sense to us, but it's sure as hell going
to confuse the general public to whom we are supposed to be more 'friendly'
these days. In practice, I suspect if we do start using language in this
rather distorted way, we will also end up confusing ourselves.
A separate record for 'historic events' (as Brian Giggins suggests) seems a
much better idea.
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Neil Campling
Sent: 10 July 2006 08:37
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Fires, Sources and Monuments
Dear all,
Surely interpreted historical events such as the Great Fire of London or
similar fires in most provincial towns should be identified in HERs as
"Monuments", i.e. as interpretations, just as Battlefields are so identified.
Several different interpretations of the same event would thus be different
Monuments.
Evidence of such Monuments, i.e. burned deposits, would be recorded
separately, as part of a archaeological recording event. Historical records
of such fires would be recorded as Sources.
Cheers
Neil
WARNING
This E-mail and any attachments may contain information that is confidential
or privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the named recipient. If
you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or any action taken is prohibited and may be unlawful.
Any opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily the view
of the Council.
North Yorkshire County Council.
==============================================================================
NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged
information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any viewing,
copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended
recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in
error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting
it from your computer.
==============================================================================
|