THE TIME TEAM is basically made up of Archaeologists, historians, artists, artisans, technicians and Tony Robinson.
Archaeologists by their very nature love to dig up the truth, buried in the past by either the sediment of time or perhaps some historical personality. Objects may lie hidden beneath our feet, be they bone or stone, sword or word, they may help to shed a little light on human history, social interaction and activity. Even old skeletons, no matter whose closet they’re in, should be exposed to the light by enquiring diggers.
Tony Robinson, I assume will not be worried by a little digging into dangerous and often frowned on aspects of revolutionary techniques in archaeology. Starting this thread I will name famous or perhaps infamous characters whose discoveries are there for all the world to see and accepted by the mainstream of modern archaeologists, but I must also ask, does their name always and without restraint accompany their discoveries? You may ask if the discoveries cannot be hidden what is the problem? – This is where the archaeologist members of the Time Team – may, raise their hands "not that old chestnut". Frederick Bligh Bond, the man who gave us the famous Digs of Glastonbury, hailed as the hero of archaeology when he unerringly uncovered the Edgar Chapel and most of the other early 20th.Century discoveries at the Glastonbury site. BUT when asked to what new methodology did he owe his list of successful digs his answer left him ostracized by his archaeologist peers and condemned to anonymity by his employers? See for yourself go to Glastonbury if you find any mention of F.B.Bond it will be insignificant, this shameful act by the establishment and academia, should be exposed by some brave Channel 4 diggers.
Only three other names need be mentioned, the late Professor J. Norman Emerson considered the founding father of Canadian Archaeology and also his friend and colleague George McMullen. The third person who never shies away from a challenge is Stephan A. Schwartz.
Whoever is curious enough to dig into this thorny issue, whether it’s Tony himself or any other Channel 4 digger, they will find a tasty hot chestnut that should not in all truth continue to be confined to the closet by the scientific establishment and archaeological academia, where skeleton’s and old bogeyman’s bones all seem destined to find a dark corner away from bright lights and today’s need to see buried truths uncovered.
Readers of this understated allegation, who enjoy the thrill of the DIG, will not have to dig too deep to uncover the foundations of my little dig at the scientific establishment.
Shame only comes if there is some sort of secret and truth that is hidden.. this sort of flim-flam is/has never been proven..at least not scientifically... and so.. use hearsay and a bloke told me down teh pub methods if you want.. but.. come on really..
is this for real.?
The allegation is not that clear.. is it the 'Factoid'
Frederick Bligh Bond (1864-1945) purportedly with the help of long-dead monks who had occupied the abbey - 'the Watchers' I am however surprised that his books are supposedly banned from Glastonbury .. and his 'real' work of uncovering the Edgar Chapel not fully acknowledged. but hey thats academia for you! He found it using methods that the Time Team use today... references, guesswork and knowledge of the period and architecture.
I would have thought that Glastonbury would have loved pseudo-archaeology books..
Thank you BAJR for some explanation of this posting.
Now for those of us who are not archaeologists and whose only qualifications are a deep interest in history... perhaps some of you can fully explain the background?
I do always enjoy it when the 'professional' -which seem to be the majority of you, supply facts and figures
My 'problem' is that in some ways it can be 'easy' to find an abbey and the bits associated with it if you are trained in ecclesiastical building and architectural methods. I have used 'sacred architecture' myself to 'predict locations' of buildings.
At Dundrennan abbey (for example) I knew where most buildings were already.. you only have to find two recognisable 'bits' to make this work. masons used standard measurements, and most structures were built to standard forms, with x number of bays by x/n wide etc etc.
At Dundrennan Abbey in Dumfries and Galloway , all I needed was the measurement of the four main pillars and the chancel. That gave me a square, and from that a grid.... the rest falls into place after that. Without need for geofizz, it was possible to measure out on teh ground where a wall should be... and even external buildings, like teh hospital where it should be and even how big. - In each case we came right down on the sites.. once you had a wall... you were off.. able to wall chase to a corner.. a corner meant you could work out the width etc etc... I truely think that he used his knowledge and ability to work out where things were (and remember there were references to them) - for that he was a brilliant excavator. - On the other hand, I often solve problems in my sleep.. dreaming up solutions to complex problems... I just put it down to my sub-concious mind at work.. free from concious constraint. I could of course claim just as sincerely I am receiving instruction.
a) I think he was a damn good archaeolgoist who used knowledge clues and good luck b) I think it is unfortunate that his work is ignored, just because he said he got it from dead monks. c) I don't think he got it from dead monks. d) Archaeologists in general never like to give anyone any credit! I am more than used to my name being written out of projects.. (but then I was an arrogant sod!) and the fame of finding sites suddenly transfers to teh director sometiems!
then get a plan of an abbey and start creating the grids.. as you can imagine having a unified architectural geometry allowed both perfection of construction and visual beauty as well as alow bulding to remain unified in construction even if built over 300 years... one measurement is the 6ft and 18ft square (3x 6ft) also used in the height as well... so you get into cubes as well as grids. Even some secular/vernacular buildings hold the same geometry..
remember the greeks were experts at using geometry to create buildings that look right.. or guide you round unconciously.. Also look at teh georgian Buidlings that seem.. just right to look at...
One might ask why Jung has not been widely discredited for his 'collective consciousness' theory and Bond castigated. Jung is used - especially in church circles which would seem a little at odds with things.
Not that I necessarily endorse automatic writing as a way of excavating -but if it delivers the goods......why knock it. Presumably other experts were able to vet the excavations as authentic?
There are more things in Heaven and earth Horatio........
and I for one am not arrogant enough to think I know the lot
This may be going out on a limb - but wasn't it at Glastonbury that some monks discovered "the graves" of Arthur and Guinevere, and made a lot of money out of it? Sometime in the thirteenth century I believe. People were more credulous in those days.
How true how true.... I guess its just teh way of things...
I do agree that he has been sidelined.. and yes I have had revelations in dreams.. but I put it down more to knowledge I have gained rahter than from spooky sources.. he was after all an architect and expert in church architecture.
The thread of this topic has followed a path, shown in the few but very interesting posts, towards the Bond/Glastonbury event. Obviously Glastonbury was already an excavated site, though detailed aspects and its overall size were unknown before Bond’s involvement in 1907 and why would a highly respected member of the establishment risk his credibility and reputation, at a time when any connection to psychic activity was virtually illegal under the witchcraft act. There was little to be gained by it, this was time before new age movements had claimed Glastonbury as their own province, there would be no best seller or acclamation from any quarter.
If I may bring us back to psychic archaeology per-se The classic triple-blind condition to ensure authenticity in most scientific experiments would here include the psychic being taken to a previously unknown site, and knowing nothing of its layout or potential content; he/she would be required to describe the surface geography and sub-surface geology; then psychically locate and identify artifacts within the location and finally, describe their positions. This is the typical fieldwork protocol that Stephan Schwartz requires as the condition for an experiment in psychic archaeology by his organization the Mobius Group. The final proof of the psychic’s ability would be exposed in the dig itself.
You may now ask where would you find a highly respected archaeologist prepared to risk his reputation by getting involved in psychic activities and who would then be prepared to publish papers for analysis by his peers; give lectures to the leading scholars of the discipline; show the details of his research and experiments with a psychic who would submit to tests by other archaeologists??
The classic example such an archaeologist was the late professor J. Norman Emerson and the psychic he worked with and befriended George McMullen..
This was an academic and scholar of unquestionable professionalism, integrity and love of archaeology. Generally regarded as the father of Canadian archaeology Norman Emerson personifies the true open minded scientist who DOES NOT say I know the answer before I conduct the experiment so there is no point in conducting the experiment.
The SHAMEFUL SECRET is that archaeologists will not admit that one of their own, has done that, been there and categorically stated that it is TRUE.
When those of you who are willing to view reality with an open mind, having dug a little into the character of professor J. Norman Emerson and his work with George McMullen and don’t still feel that it’s all flim flam and hocus pocus or relegated to the equivalent of a conversation with the bloke in the pub, we may be able to continue.
Originally posted by brushbrain: ................>>>
When those of you who are willing to view reality with an open mind, having dug a little into the character of professor J. Norman Emerson and his work with George McMullen and don’t still feel that it’s all flim flam and hocus pocus or relegated to the equivalent of a conversation with the bloke in the pub, we may be able to continue.
AF
Is this a personal vendetta ?
........................................................................ Support the PAS Go with the FLO
When those of you who are willing to view reality with an open mind, having dug a little into the character of professor J. Norman Emerson and his work with George McMullen and don’t still feel that it’s all flim flam and hocus pocus or relegated to the equivalent of a conversation with the bloke in the pub, we may be able to continue.
well indeed I hoped that is what we were doing.. though I guess that if people don’t agree then they are of closed mind.. and people who agree are of ‘open’ mind.
That said.. I actually have a book I bought and read back in the 80s.. called Psychic Archaeology. Detailing much of what brushbrain has talked about. I did find the chapters interesting and looked at them in great detail, noticing a great similarity in most reports where mistakes or inaccuracies were the fault of either archaeologists or interpretation of questions and answers WHILE saying that the roman building would have many rooms and a floor made of small tiles OR that saying that a typical rectangular building with a central hearth would be found on a site where that’s the sort of buildings you find is somehow an amazing revelation.
I along with archaeologists do this every day, predicting, testing, rejecting, expecting re-examining, confirming.
I can tell you that on a development site I, (as the curator) predicted that some sort of settlement was possible and the archaeology company should watch out for a roman road. (not psychic ability, but an understanding of the surrounding archaeology – oh… and a ruddy great fort about 1km away) Then… shock horror… the team found two ditches running parallel about 5m apart with gravel between.. I had warned them that the road would be 5-6 m wide. The also found a stretch of gently curving gully… I can tell them (though they would slap me!) that it will be 8-10m in diameter, there will be a central hearth and the entrance will be to the east.. watch out for a smaller gully about 80cm out from the bigger one and also pits should be found to the rear. No… I was not there (though it would make my life easier) I just use accumulated knowledge. I have used dowsers before – and done it myself.. the crystal map dowser was however the worst.. in fact the joke was that if you dug anywhere but where he said walls were.. you might find something.. he was uncanny is his ability to predict nothing!
Anyway… back to this…………. I have looked, my mind was and is open… but don’t tell me that predicting where chapels are is mystic… or knowing that native American houses are X metres by X meters long and tell me that is somehow using psi-powers. Give it a go… there is a field behind my house.. it has archaeology in it… quite clear and typical.. What is it? I am not trying to be sarcastic or offensive, but please understand that I can think that Bond was treated unfairly fro his excellent work… You purport that psychic ability was looked down on even against the law… well that now quite true.. as at the time it was all the rage.. in fact Houdini often spent time debunking them – in the company of police and reporters – for defrauding people. Conan Doyle (a supporter of Bond) was a greater believer.. and enemy of Houdini. (writing threatening letters even).
That’s why Bond went to the USA… because there was a lot of people who wanted to believe.. and obviously still do. Pity, because the human mind is amazing enough.. able to work things out using sheer noddlepower!
Originally posted by pepinouska: This may be going out on a limb - but wasn't it at Glastonbury that some monks discovered "the graves" of Arthur and Guinevere, and made a lot of money out of it? Sometime in the thirteenth century I believe. People were more credulous in those days.
Yes, that's right, although it was the Twelfth not the Thirteenth Century. I would guess that it had just as much to do with politics , ecclesiastical as well as secular. The information is supposed to have come from Brittany via Henry II. The famous cross with the inscription telling us who was buried in the graves has never been traced.
As Ann said earlier.. thre are more things on heaven and earth.. but that would make Stuart Ainsworth a psychic too... its looking at the evidence, having experience and using rational powers of reason. I have not seen any real evidence for Psychic Archaeology that stands up to full scrutiny. Any recent cases in the UK?
Iam not sure this really qualifies as "archaeology's shameful secret". I think Bligh Bond's problems were as much (if not more) with the CofE (for his sacred geometry ideas as much as the psychic stuff) than with the archaeologists. In any case all this spiritualist stuff was all the rage about this time. Last time I was there I am sure I saw something about him in the visitor's centre. Also his is the design of the cover of Chalice Well.
My old professor Jerzy Gąssowski was interested in this, he got a famous faith healer (Zbigniew Nowak) to go into visionary trances and hold an artefact and describe what he "saw". They were working together on a book, but nothing came of it, but I think there is an article published somewhere but it'd be in Polish. Also of course many archaeologists will freely admit to believing in dowsing which (in some manifestations anyway) is something akin to this.
In the days of my youth (and for many years) I was a bellringer as I am sure some of you are. My point it that bellringers develop something called 'ropesight' soemtimes you just see where the bell should be.
As BAJR says experience surely develops this conviction and one just 'knows'. Spiritualism came very much to the fore in the 20s when so many young men were just wiped out in the war and grieving families and lovers had to find some kind of end to their pain
PS-- I have tried dowsing and the rods twiched over water -but I knew it was there -did my mind control the rods? Who would know.....some people I know swear dowsing is a sure way of finding things. I keep an open mind
Used dowsing with rods myself on two occassions .. worked both times... lokoing for roman ditches at a fort and lokoing for ater channels in the black desert in Jordan.. both times I did it blindfolded and people put arrows in the ground... I suspect that it is a change in the magnetic field in the earth over water or waterlogged material.. thus causing minute electrical change in my hands to twitch the rods.. (so to speak) I have more difficulty with map dowsing and dowsing for metal etc.. But with dowsing I can understand a principal.. though you can't beat GeoFizz!
