Old Bones, Old Stones, New Pagans
The ongoing question of what position modern Pagans should take regarding pre-Christian sites and remains continues. Where do we find the balance between a reverence for our religious ancestors, and acknowledging the needs of scientists and preservationists. Two news stories have been developing that explore these issues.
First, the Kennet District Council has given an enforcement notice to the National Trust over ongoing mistreatment of the Avebury Stone circle in Wiltshire. Central to the complaint is the use of the circle by Pagans and “New Age” visitors.
“A spokesman said complaints had been received about bad behaviour caused by the influx of New Age visitors…A council spokesman said: “The council has warned the National Trust that it should not allow overnight camping and caravanning in its car parks because it is a breach of planning control…[Regional director Brendan McCarthy] said: ‘We are all aware of the unsuitability of the current car park for the larger pagan celebrations and the trust is committed to finding an alternative which will be acceptable to all parties.’”
The tension between access and preservation is felt deeply in Britain where several pre-Christian sites are felt to be sacred by the local Pagan community. Eric A. Powell of Archaelogy magazine says that this shared reverence for sites like Avebury and Stonehenge are one of the few uniting features of modern Paganism in Britain.
“What unites them is a respect…for ancient British traditions. Pagans also believe that some archaeological sites are sacred ground, places of spiritual power where celebration, meditation, and communication with spirits and ancestors are all possible. Ritual processions and gathering in large circles to invoke spirits are common pagan observances at ancient sites.”
Pagans in the UK are trying to band together in groups like PEBBLE (The Public Bodies Liaison Committee for British Paganism) to better communicate with government bodies on issues (like access to old stones) of importance. Since the Avebury Stone Circle was made a World Heritage site in 1986 (along with Stonehenge), “reducing visitor erosion” has become an ongoing concern and it remains to be seen how well the managing bodies will be able to find a workable compromise between the needs of “church” and “state”.
The second story concerns reburial of pre-Christian remains. I blogged recently about the quixotic efforts of Chris Warwick (aka Cyt ap Nydden) to stop scientific “grave robbing” of pre-Christian sites and to provide reburial for bodies dug up for research. Now the Oxford Student reports that Warwick has met with a sort of “success” since the Oxford University’s Museum of Natural History has agreed to (temporarily) return the Red Lady of Paviland (a 26,000 year old skeleton) to Wales. But it is clear in the article that Welsh pride and political pressure is more to thank than Warwick’s media stunts.
This issue in the UK has also been taken up by the Council of British Druid Orders who have sent a letter to the English Heritage and the National Trust demanding reburial for pagan remains. Nick Hanks, a Pagan who has worked with both English Heritage and the National Trust feels that their efforts are causing more harm than good.
“There is a serious debate going on about this within the heritage sector and they are listening to Pagans’ concerns, but you would not know that from the tone of the document sent to the National Trust by COBDO…The positions of archaeologist, Druid Council and everybody else should be possible to resolve in a compromise solution. We all respect the remains of our ancestors, we just differ in how to express it. Druids in the past were known as peacemakers and negotiators between warring tribes, it would be nice if the Druid Council could do the same rather than take sides on this issue!”
A scholarly paper that Hanks links to sums up the issue very well.
“Meanings inscribed in ancient ’sacred’ sites are complex; sites have meanings for people which are spiritual, emotional, and political; and construction of meaning cannot be separated from political or pragmatic circumstances surrounding sites. Pagan claims to the past, particularly those which deploy such terms as ‘ancestors’ and which call for the ‘reburial’ of human remains and artefacts, are as much politically motivated as they are spiritually so. But archaeologists cannot claim scientific immunity here since their interpretations of the past are also constructions.”
In the end, it seems that only cool heads and compromise will ensure any sort of middle ground on the issues of access to ancient sites and reburial for pre-Christian remains. But can this attitude be fostered when the press seems to love media stunts and grand gestures instead of incremental change and slow steps towards understanding?
5 responses so far
When I was in college I studied human and primate skeletal anatomy as part of my paleontology courses. It never bothered me to work with the skeletons of people who had sold their bones while living (that is done in poorer parts of the world), to be harvested after their deaths. But it did bother me exceedingly, to the point of mystic troubles, when I had to work with the Native American remains that poured into the Smithsonian in cartloads from those mounds in the Midwest. If scientists want to keep artifacts, fine. If they want to take pictures and DNA, fine. But all skeletons of humans who have not previously assented to have them used for science should be re-interred exactly where they were found. Not doing so disturbs The Force, and I can’t think of another way to put it.
It’s a shame that the Guardian covered the unrepresentative COBDO demonstration instead of the much more moderate and sensible conference on this issue.
My views on this issue can be found here. I favour a compromise, as I would like the concept of respect to be much more about memory than about reburial. I want to be remembered after I die, and I suspect our distant ancestors felt the same. I think the issue in Britain is different from the Native American issue, because the burial practices are very different.
The group claiming to speak for the Council of British Druid Orders on this subject is, in fact, an unauthorised and fraudulent group whose main two members were expelled by CoBDO proper last year and have set up a rival group claiming to be CoBDO. Legal action is currently being taken to prevent them from using this name.
I, as elected Scribe of CoBDO, would like to state that the views stated by this fake ‘CoBDO’ are not the views of the Council proper – CoBDO supports the work of HAD and has no need of a ‘Reburial Officer’. We in the 21st century have no idea what people believed and would not be so arrogant as to impose a modern Pagan set of beliefs and conduct a reburial using those beliefs on a skeleton dug up archaeologically.
CoBDO supports Nick Hanks’ comments and are saddened that he has had complaints raised against him by imposters claiming to be CoBDO.
KD
Scribe
CoBDO
Peace.
The Council of British Druid Orders believes that the current conflicts within the Council are best resolved through private dialogue mediated by individuals independent to both parties, and not discussed openly on the internet. This helps no one and hurts everyone.
This Council would like to repeat our previous offers for both parties to attend such talks in the near future. This is best done asap. We have already invited the ‘other cobdo’ group to such negociations and hope for resolution before any more back-stabbing can take place.
Paul Davies /|\
Reburial Officer, COBDO and Secular Order of Druids
How can one have any sensible dialogue with persons displaying the arrogance of the post above..’the Council..our previous offer..and not discussed openly on the internet’.Almost risible, possibly a trifle sad…meglomania and tunnel vision in equal parts.COBDO have rescinded the position of reburial officer, due to an individual exploiting this role in order to propound his exceedlingly mediocre thesis,which has more holes in than a Swiss cheese. This person, thankfully, does not, in any way, represent COBDO.