Returning to Rome after a few weeks away is like rediscovering it. At times frustratingly, when city layout is suddenly forgotten, most times pleasantly, when finding a new landmark, or sensing a different pace now that autumn is here. The tourist season continues unabatted, and always gives me material on how the past is presented and perceived by non-archaeologists.

This week also sees publication of an article - not about Rome, but still about heritage and the public - in the magazine, British Archaeology see http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba.html.

This time it is two eternal sites rather than an eternal city under the miscroscope, and not through my gaze, but that of three archaeology students who I taught in Oxford during the summer. They were part of a group from the University of Oklahoma who I took to see two significant prehistoric sites - Stonehenge and White Horse Hill - on the same July day.

These were students majoring in other subjects back in the US, and this was a chance to see how they experienced the sites as almost novices. Two of the students wrote first hand accounts, the edited versions appear in British Archaeology. A third, Jason Clow, who did not make the trip to the real sites, I invited to "observe" and compare as online sites.

Jason's insightful study, which I had to cut back considerably for the hard copy, raised such interesting issues it begged being published in full online. So here it is.

History Through the Fence

The massive stone column stands inches away from my face; I reach out to touch its rough edges, but feel only glass. This curious experience is unique to those who do an internet search of an ancient site like Stonehenge. Using a keyboard to carve the name “Stonehenge” into a search engine like Google, allows one to experience the monument in a way its builders could never have imagined, but how this site is experienced in person differs greatly from how it was experienced centuries ago as well. On the other hand, if web-surfers bring another ancient site, “White Horse,” into the computer age, they will learn that, unlike Stonehenge, White Horse can be experienced now much as it was when it was created. While they may not get to feel the wind through their hair or the centuries-old earth beneath their feet like those who see these monuments in person, it is possible for even “internet tourists” to see the contrast in how both monuments are experienced in the real world by noting their marked differences in cyberspace.

0.13 seconds – that’s how long it takes to dig up an immeasurable amount of information on an area that has baffled men for centuries. Stonehenge’s purpose is not known, but there are plenty of theories and even more web pages to match. Google’s first return on a long list (1,300,000) of hits is an English Heritage website. With a quite orderly arrangement, like the stones themselves, this website alone offers hours of reading. I spent a while exploring the timeline, a map of the area, frequently asked questions, and various other parts. Not only did I discover much about Stonehenge’s history, but, reading between the lines, I got a sense of some present-day conflict that is not directly addressed by the site itself. This is best illustrated by the frequently asked questions (faqs) section. For instance, one of the questions asked in the faqs is “Why can’t we go into the center circle?” This is the first instance where I see some resistance to the way the monument is now experienced. The next question asks “Why do we have to pay as this is our heritage?” Scrolling down I see that the answer to both questions has to do with preservation and upkeep respectively, but somehow, I get the sense that there are those who are not happy with the contrivances now plaguing the monument and would like to experience it in their own way. Other areas on the site include planned visits with knowledgeable tour guides and some projections about the future of the area. The name English Heritage appears as often as the name Stonehenge leaving little doubt that the site’s present and future is firmly under their control. Ownership of the area has switched hands throughout history, but this time, it seems, things are much different.

Other sites offer a few things the English Heritage site does not. There are some fascinating theories surrounding Stonehenge’s purpose. One of which I found particularly interesting, that it was an ancient calculator, because I liked the irony of using one computer to learn more about another. The long string of sites continues with some web pages that uncover a different experience of the area through poetry. I finally end my perusal of sites after reading some amusing theories about the extra-terrestrial assistance of Stonehenge’s construction. Switching gears, I use a search engine to examine the lesser known Uffington White Horse. Although not quite as famous as Stonehenge, these two sites do have a great deal in common. Like Stonehenge, the purpose of White Horse is not known. A large chalk outline of a horse (some say a dragon) carved in the hillside may have been a local tribe’s symbol, tribute to the gods, or a special place for ceremony; no one can say for sure. What is certain is that the differences in the two sites and how they are experienced bleed through cyber space. Although this area is cared for by English Heritage too, Google did not list an English Heritage site first. Instead, I went through a patchwork of different web pages all giving a slightly different spin on the ancient figure. One site listed a few items that highlight important differences in White Horse and Stonehenge. First, there is no visitor center, just a place to park and a steep hill to climb. There is no admission charge, and there are no tours, simply the ancient world experienced and defined by each individual visitor almost exactly as it was when first built. Even the web photos testify to the open and uncontrived nature of the site. Green hills surrounded by open fields frame a peculiar white outline at the top of a prominence. Noting how differently these two places are experienced on the web, I know, is only a hint of how differently they must be perceived by an actual visit. As I browse through the different pages I find a few short lines at the end of a page that may hint at forthcoming change. There were plans (at least in 2004) to erect a fence around White Horse. Perhaps it is for the best. Preservation is undeniably important. Yet, I can’t stop wondering how those photos would look if White Horse were framed, not by the rolling green hills, but instead by a large, imposing fence.

Recently, due to boredom, curiosity, and a lack of funds, I have become a tourist in my own home state of Oklahoma. One of my more recent destinations was “Boiling Springs State Park.” An area whose “claim to fame” is these cold-water springs which, oddly, flow upward through the sand to give the curious appearance that the water is boiling. Yet, upon visiting these springs, I found myself annoyed by the fact that they were enclosed in a concrete “box” of some sort. Once a stop for settlers to renew their fresh water supplies, the closest visitors can get now is to peer over the railing. This contrivance seems to rob guests of the opportunity to experience the area in their own way; they cannot wade into the cool water or feel the sand bubble up beneath them. It’s a state park now; it must be preserved, protected, and controlled. Concerning an area like Stonehenge, the afore-mentioned problem is more serious because, for those who believe the monument to be their heritage, it is with more than a simple annoyance that they wish to define the experience for themselves. Despite its seeming impracticability, they may often find themselves wishing the systems of preservation away leaving nothing between them and the experience.

For those who want to skip the travel expenses, the internet offers a unique opportunity to look at and learn about many of the world’s exotic locations without leaving home. Ancient mysteries can be explored through hundreds of thousands of different web-sites each giving the reader a new spin. It is then worth noting that how an individual experiences these areas will, of course, be under the control of one particular party. This is manifested both in cyberspace and in the real world, and it can prove frustrating to those who wish to experience an area for themselves. While the forces of preservation work in one direction, the want of a restriction-free environment pushes in another. A compromise between the two would be optimal, but the subjectivity of where such a balance lies makes it difficult to determine. For now, it seems we may have to be content with viewing history through a fence.

Works Cited

Famous Conspiracy Theories. Violations. Aug. 10 2005 <http://www.violations.org.uk/>.

Hows, Mark. Web page. Aug. 9 2005. Aug. 10 2005 http://www.hows.org.uk/personal/hillfigs/uff/uffing.htm

Mace, Emily. Web page. April 20 2000. Aug. 10 2005 http://www.amherst.edu/~ermace/sth/sth.html

Stonehenge. English Heritage. Aug. 10 2005 http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.876

Tourist Information UK. July 2003. Aug. 10 2005 http://www.tourist-information-uk.com/white-horse.htm

The Uffington white horse. Wiltshire White Horses. Aug. 7 2005. Aug. 10 2005 http://wiltshirewhitehorses.org.uk/uffington.html