Archaeologists Rebury 'First-of-Its-Kind' Roman Villa (smithsonianmag.com) 26
Ruins of a sprawling ancient Roman villa discovered in the United Kingdom have been reburied, just one year after their discovery was announced. From a report: Historic England, a government preservation organization, hopes the move will safeguard the "first-of-its-kind" archeological site for future generations, reports BBC News. The discovery last year delighted experts, who underscored its historical significance. "These archaeological remains are a fantastic find and are far more than we ever dreamed of discovering at this site," said Keith Emerick, inspector of ancient monuments at Historic England, in a statement last year. "They are already giving us a better knowledge and understanding of Roman Britain."
Archaeologists unearthed the ruins in Scarborough, England, in 2021 when investigating land slated for a housing development. The structures found are likely from a "high status" property, such as a luxury dwelling or religious site. The compound, which included a luxury bathhouse, could even have been a "stately home-cum-gentleman's club," reported the Guardian's Alexandra Topping last year. Roughly the size of two tennis courts, the villa had a circular center that was probably a tower, per the BBC, with hallways leading to several rooms and outbuildings. Regardless of how the villa was used, archeologists agree it was "designed by the highest-quality architects in northern Europe in the era and constructed by the finest craftsmen," said Karl Battersby, who works for the North Yorkshire county council, to the Guardian.
Archaeologists unearthed the ruins in Scarborough, England, in 2021 when investigating land slated for a housing development. The structures found are likely from a "high status" property, such as a luxury dwelling or religious site. The compound, which included a luxury bathhouse, could even have been a "stately home-cum-gentleman's club," reported the Guardian's Alexandra Topping last year. Roughly the size of two tennis courts, the villa had a circular center that was probably a tower, per the BBC, with hallways leading to several rooms and outbuildings. Regardless of how the villa was used, archeologists agree it was "designed by the highest-quality architects in northern Europe in the era and constructed by the finest craftsmen," said Karl Battersby, who works for the North Yorkshire county council, to the Guardian.
Already exposed (Score:1)
Rebury it? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That would take more money.
By reburying it, some developer can slap shoddy houses on it which will last about 50 years before collapsing and forming a perma-crap layer above it which will protect it until a time that archeologists are funded like the military.
Re:Rebury it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, and unfortunately the article doesn't actually state why the site is being reburied. It does provide some boilerplate from an unrelated Getty Foundation web page regarding why (in general) this is sometimes done; but there's absolutely no information why *this* site is being reburied.
The whole article seems like really lazy intern-quality writing - someone spent 10-15 minutes reading other web pages and then wrote a summary.
Re:Rebury it? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, rebury it (Score:5, Insightful)
Makes no sense. Excavate it and document the heck out of it, then preserve it like modern buildings such as the pyramids are preserved.
I don't think the pyramids count as "modern buildings" unless you are referring to the one at the Louvre. However, there is a problem with this in that the UK has thousands of years of history and a very high population density. This means that they have to be picky about what is preserved for display and education vs. what is just preserved for posterity.
My sister lives in the same village as this site and while she took her kids from the local primary school to see it from the sounds of it there was not much there to see despite it being academically important. Sites like that will not attract many visitors and the academic data has already been collected so reburying it so life can carry on above it as it already has for almost 2,000 years is a sensible option. The UK is not North America where anything older than about 50 years is considered almost prehistoric and hence rare and important and with such a low population density that space is not an issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Old Oraibi has been continually inhabited since about 1100 AD. Shove that up your smug limey ass Roger.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Britain has been continually inhabited since long before the Romans arrived, so what?
Besides which Americans don't teach Native American history in classes anyway. So the GP's point is made and underscored by your comment.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha. That's cute. You're cute. Here, would you like a nice slice of cheese [theguardian.com]?
Re: (Score:2)
Old Oraibi has been continually inhabited since about 1100 AD. Shove that up your smug limey ass Roger.
My hometown in the UK has been continually inhabited since 555 AD. London was founded about 500 years before that.
"Recent Oraibi" more like.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
then preserve it like modern buildings
So, open it to the public for TikTok dancers to prance around on it and completely destroy it?
Modern archaeology is anything but preserved. We're actively destroying it every chance we get, and anything we're not destroying we're modifying in desperate attempts to keep it standing.
Re:Rebury it? (Score:5, Interesting)
then preserve it like modern buildings such as the pyramids are preserved.
The pyramids haven't exactly been preserved.
Even the best of them have had almost all of their outer layers removed, and what you see today is the inner structure. The worst of them are piles of rubble. Anything of interest inside was looted centuries ago.
The only reason anything is left of them today is because of the sheer quantity of mass that was piled up onto one spot.
(But perhaps you were really in Las Vegas and just got confused by the shiny pyramid there.)
Re: (Score:2)
Reburial is a standard technique used by archaeologists for sites that need to be characterized by researchers but for which there is no hope of preserving for ongoing public access at the moment. After a site has been documented and reburied, it can be made into a museum later.
In my area there are about three thousand sites of ancient Mesoamerican habitation, many of them being those "cliff dwellings" you see on so many calendars. Only four of them have been set up as public museums.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I volunteer at a dig site and is worked on around 2 months a year. I can go back to places where I previous excavated and two year later the place has the walls falling in, trash and wind blown dirt is starting to fill in the areas. It has been three years with no one there, covid reasons, so the place will now be really be a mess.
W
Re: (Score:3)
Go stand in any spot in the UK and, more often than not, you don't have to travel more than 45 minutes to go see multiple Roman or other historically significant locations.
People underestimate just how packed the UK (and Europe) is with history - this site has been discovered and documented, it doesn't need to become another money sink for English Heritage or the National Trust, just put it back in the ground and let people enjoy photos of it at nearby exhibitions and other related sites.
There used to be a
Re: (Score:3)
I love watching the Time Team Classics episodes on YouTube. Time Team Classics [youtube.com]
They have a new team funded by patreon donations that are still doing digs based on the original format, and they are very good, but I miss Tony Robinson as host.
Re: (Score:2)
Catch and release archeology.
Hmm... (Score:4, Funny)
We've got one of those cum-gentlemen's clubs right down the road a couple miles.
What's important. (Score:4, Funny)
Did the FBI raid the place?
Translation (Score:2)
The UK is out of money.
Layer overloading (Score:3)
Future archaeologists: "Wow, the ancient Romans had Mt. Dew, Cheetos, and FitBits based on the waste they left behind.
Why is this news? Happens all the time. (Score:2)
Archaeological sites in the UK at least are often partially investigated and then filled in, to preserve them for future investigation with tools we have yet to invent.
It's not as if we have a shortage of Roman villa sites. They look pretty, but generally the only confirm what's already known. Besides, the Roman period has contemporary written history. The exciting stuff is Bronze Age and earlier...