In a message dated 03/02/2008 17:39:41 GMT Standard Time, [log in to unmask]
The acts of all societies, ancient and modern are of archaeological
This is true. However, the Burra Charter gives guidance about the
modern/ancient conservation conundrum -
1. The traces of additions, alterations and earlier treatments to the fabric
of a place are evidence of its history and uses. These will often be a major
part of its significance. Conservation action should assist and not impede
However, there should be -
2. A cautious approach to change - do as much as necessary to care for the
place and to make it useable, but otherwise change it as little as possible so
that its cultural significance is maximised and...
3. New construction, demolition, intrusions or other changes adversely
affecting the setting or relationships of a place are inappropriate .
I think this can be boiled down to the simple maxim that you can't have both
change and the original and a judgement has to be made in each case as to
which embodies the more significant cultural significance. In this case the
ancient cultural significance of rock art far outweighs that of the daubings of
ill-informed twentieth century military oiks and to speculate the latter has
any sort of equivalence to the former is not on.