Are the bones not in the Barnstaple Museum? Are they not available for
If they are secreted somewhere then I would be appalled.
I would always encourage the publication of research, even if that
publications is of an inconclusive result.
It does seem that this matter generated great passion, with lots of people
wanting different truths to suit their own political agenda - not, sadly, a
first for archaeology.
Bonekickers did, at very least, highlight exactly these issues - and the
portrayal of vested interest wanting different truths was a powerful part of
And the Professor's excitement at having KEN! LIVINGSTONE! coming to
apologise for the slave trade was hugely amusing in the context of a
Presidential candidate's visit of which he was unaware.Sometimes old, cheap,
gags are the best; that's why they are old. "Collapse of stout party"
It also raised the whole question of what value an apology from someone who
was not responsible for the fault actually has.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Trevor Dunkerley" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:29 PM
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Slaves of Raparee
> Thank you for you comments which I personally agree with entirely. I
> cannot however speak for others who I know at the time of the events were
> personally deeply hurt and aggrieved and I feel have now put such events
> behind them and have moved on.
> If there are any questions to be answered regarding the 'Slaves of
> Raparee', then I feel these must lie with Horton. You will have seen and
> earlier missive from Paul Blinkhorn and his URL of the Guardian story of
> As I have suggested before, Horton needs to 'come clean'. What happened to
> the bones? Where are they now? Why have they never been fully reported on?
> Kindest regards,
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Tooke" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Slaves of Raparee
>> Trevor, you say, "Several, who had watched the screening the
>> following evening were incandescent with anger that the issue had been
>> raised once more, and we were all empathic with the original finder of
>> site, who was treated so badly during that period of regretful events."
>> I can only speak for my own attitude, but if it were a subject about
>> which I felt strongly then I would be very pleased that it was raised,
>> and re-raised, and would welcome the opportunity to work towards righting
>> any perceived wrongs.
>> The more the light of investigation shines the less chance there is of
>> underhanded doings remaining secret, and the greater the chance that the
>> truth (as far as it can be seen) will out, and honest integrity have a
>> chance of being recognised.
>> Sleeping dogs are generally best woken and taken for a run.
>> Dave Tooke
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Trevor Dunkerley" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:37 PM
>> Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Slaves of Raparee
>>> Thank you for enlightening the list on the subject of the 'Slaves of
>>> Raparee'. I can only just wonder if you have read the book by Pat
>>> Barrow, and his side of the events.
>>> Quite clearly this was not just an issue regarding the 'archaeology of
>>> slavery', but also the attitudes of the 'academic' versus the 'amateur'.
>>> Whilst I entirely agree with you, in your words, "I don't see why such a
>>> controversy should not have been used as basis for a plot component in
>>> fictional drama," I really fail to see why Horton should not come clean
>>> in agreeing that he alone passed this information to the scriptwriters
>>> as the basis for the plot.
>>> Whilst throughout the rest of the UK this issue may be non
>>> controversial, here in North Devon, memories last long, and as an
>>> archaeologist who has spent the last dozen or so year attempting to
>>> promote community archaeology initiatives, memories of how the Slaves of
>>> Raparee issue was handled by the media, archaeological academics, and as
>>> Pat Barrow states in his book, "other powers-that-be", still leaves a
>>> 'nasty taste in the mouth', and is counterproductive to open and
>>> truthful archaeological communications and the encouragement of
>>> communities to participate in what is "their archaeology and history."
>>> After the screening of episode 2, I joined other North Devon persons the
>>> following morning at our National Archaeological Week event - the only
>>> one on North Devon north of Exeter. Several, who had watched the
>>> screening the following evening were incandescent with anger that the
>>> issue had been raised once more, and we were all empathic with the
>>> original finder of the site, who was treated so badly during that period
>>> of regretful events.
>>> Honest integrity can be so easily destroyed. We all know Pat Barrow and
>>> respect his integrity and the work his has painstakingly carried out in
>>> North Devon for many years.
>>> Money, in archaeology, appears to be the driving force these days for
>>> destroying many a reputation. Why should it not be challenged?
>>> Kindest regards,
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "PETTS D.A." <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 8:19 PM
>>> Subject: [BRITARCH] Slaves of Raparee
>>> For those who want a little enlightening about this subject
>>> and particularly the last paragraph of this
>>> (strangely prophetic)
>>> For what its worth it appears that there is genuine debate over these
>>> remains and clearly some controversy. I don't see why such a controversy
>>> should not have been used as basis for a plot component in a fictional
>>> drama, particularly when the debate over the identity of the bones was
>>> very much a subplot in the overall story arc. Frankly, it would be much
>>> more unrealistic to have an episode that engaged with the archaeology of
>>> slavery without highlighting the controversy and high passions that such
>>> an issue inevitably provokes (for which see the following article by one
>>> of Mark's former colleagues Dan Hicks)