Skip to comments.5,000-Year-Old Axe Head Found On Stonehenge World Heritage Site
Posted on 09/21/2003 3:03:25 PM PDT by blam
5000-YEAR-OLD AXE HEAD FOUND ON STONEHENGE WORLD HERITAGE SITE
By David Prudames 19/09/2003
Photo: field walkers from Wessex Archaeology covered a 90-hectare area in three weeks in search of ancient artefacts. Photo: Elaine Wakefield. © Wessex Archaeology.
Archaeologists have discovered a 5000-year-old polished stone axe head during an investigation of an area that forms part of the Stonehenge World Heritage Site.
Dating back to the Neolithic Age - 3000 to 2500 BC - the axe head was found, along with a leaf-shaped arrowhead, during a three-week field walk of farmland by Wessex Archaeology.
Covering a 90-hectare area, the farmland is situated within a kilometre of both the Stonehenge monument and the stone circle at Avebury.
Tony Trueman of Wessex Archaeology told the 24 Hour Museum the exercise was part of a project to improve the conservation of the area by turning ploughed land into grassland pasture.
"The general point is not to plough up land so close to such important remains, because it damages them," said Tony.
Photo: the Stonehenge World Heritage Site has an unusually high concentration of prehistoric remains. © English Heritage.
Explaining that the conversion to pasture gave archaeologists the chance to look for artefacts turned up by the plough, Tony added that there was only a short window of opportunity.
"After a while the grass gets too high to see anything, so we have to catch the moment before it gets too long."
With its unusual concentration of prehistoric remains, the landscape around Stonehenge is continuously yielding fascinating artefacts.
Although the axe head has not been used, tools of its type would normally have had a wooden haft and would have been put to work cutting down trees.
Photo: tools similar to the axe head would have been put to work chopping down trees to clear land for pasture. Photo: Elaine Wakefield. © Wessex Archaeology.
"The axe head is a very interesting find," explained Andy Crockett, Wessex Archaeology Project Manager, "because it relates to a period in our past when farmers first started to chop down trees to start growing crops and keeping livestock."
Nowadays, farmers are provided with a special grant by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to change the use of land in archaeologically rich areas.
The scheme is also intended to improve the ecology of the area by providing extended chalk grass habitats for birds, insects and wild flowers.
"These projects are a major step towards the long-term conservation of the Stonehenge landscape," added Isabelle Bedu, Stonehenge World Heritage Site Co-ordinator.
These National Treasures no longer belong to the American Citizens
I understand Carter & Clinton giving away our country - but Reagan??!! Why?!?!
World Heritage Sites
1978 Mesa Verde National Park (CARTER)
1978 Yellowstone National Park (CARTER)
1979 Everglades National Park (CARTER)
1979 Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve (CARTER)
1979 Grand Canyon National Park (CARTER)
1979 Independence Hall National Historical Park (CARTER)
1981 Olympic National Park (CARTER)
1979 Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (CARTER)
1980 Redwood National Park (CARTER)
1981 Mammoth Cave National Park (CARTER)
1983 Great Smoky Mountains National Park (REAGAN)
1983 San Juan National Historical Site (REAGAN)
1984 Statue of Liberty National Monument (REAGAN)
1984 Yosemite National Park (REAGAN)
1987 Chaco Culture National Historical Park (REAGAN)
1987 Hawaii Volcanos National Park (REAGAN)
1995 Carlsbad Caverns National Park (CLINTON)
1995 Waterton Glacier International Peace Park (CLINTON)
Well, no, actually it doesn't...I'm puzzled by this. Recognition by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site doesn't in any way change the ownership of the site or the land.
Well, yes, of course. But how can you possibly imply that UNESCO 'controls' a World Heritage Site?
I have rather more than an academic interest in this, since I have the good fortune to live quite close to Stonehenge and even closer to a newly-designated World Heritage Site, the Jurassic Coast of East Devon and Dorset. I've followed closely the determined campaign by the local authorities and other interests over several years to secure this recognition, which is seen by everyone in the area as a great honour. UNESCO has absolutely no 'control' over the Jurassic Coast, which remains entirely in the control of the existing private landowners, local authorities and, in the case of some stretches, the National Trust. The only obligation to UNESCO is to permit monitoring of the Site's conservation and preservation, which can scarcely be described as 'control', since there is absolutely no power to enforce it in the highly unlikely contingency that it would no longer be welcome.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on, off, or alter the "Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list --
Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
The GGG Digest -- Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
Ok, it's mine. I left it there after a wild night of solstice partying.
Designation as a UN World Heritage Site basically means that no development of any kind can be attempted within 30 miles of the site itself.
I happen to know this because I own some property around Zion Canyon in southern Utah. The UN has been trying to designate Zion and Bryce canyons as World Heritage sites. In the meantime, the largest known untapped deposits of coal and natural gas on the planet happen to exist in the region (have we forgotten Escalante Nat'l Monument, created by executive order of Billy Jeff already?). While the status of Escalante and the UN's dalliance in the state are being hashed out in courts, property owners are being denied the right and opportunity to profit from their property.
It has gotten so bad that many of the towns in southern Utah have passed ordinances aimed at making it clear that the UN and it's minions are not welcome at all. There was even a town ordinance in Virgin, Utah which stated that all adult males should be armed, just in case the UN showed up.
I haven't been back for about three years now, so I don't know if that actually passed into law (but it would be neat, wouldn't it?).