The sudden unshrouding of a timber circle on a beach caused a ripple of excitement throughout the Pagan and archaeological communities. Pagans were excited because it was obviously an ancient ritual site - never mind cynical noises about a fish drying Thing: why would anyone build something to dry fish on 30 miles away from the sea? - and because it was the only ancient timber circle to be discovered with the wood intact. Archaeologists were excited for the same reasons, but perhaps have less of an emotional resonance with the sites of our Ancestors.

English Heritage, the Government body responsible for the care of English archaeology, announced that they were only going to record it and then allow it to be destroyed by the sea. Many archaeologists and Pagans agreed with them but an equal number didn’t and I was one of those who campaigned for the site to be fully excavated.

I wanted to know how old it was, who built it, how long it might have taken them, what the structure might have been for. Recording the placement of the timbers would have told us, perhaps, who built it but the story of the site would be lost forever.

So EH decided to fund the excavation, a decision I still believe to be right. This is, after all, the only circle of its type in the world.

But they released absolutely no information on how they’d be doing it and how the timbers would be preserved. Does it matter? Yes. Because the days are long gone when the public are satisfied with “We know best” and because the structure was built for ceremony, probably sacred. Even if we have no understanding of how people 4,000 years ago performed ceremony we must still respect their intent - reverence, fear, love - motivations that cause people to create symbolic structures. Whatever it was that caused them to build it they were prepared to cut oak with simple tools, to move the heavy wood to a new site, to dig deep foundations, calculate alignments, create a palisade of wood enclosing the huge inverted crown of the tree. This structure was not necessary for their physical survival. Its building entailed a formidable expenditure of energy that did not result in shelter, food or clothing. Whatever it was for it had some important symbolic meaning for the builders.

Four thousand years on I believe that the care and passion that went into its building should be respected and shared with whoever wanted to know about it. The sharing of information is the whole point of excavation. But EH weren’t sharing and this is nothing new for them.

Drawing a complete blank from EH I contacted the Norfolk Wildlife Trust who manage the land which holds the site and suggested to them that a web cam and web page might be set up and this was temporarily done, but that was it.
So it’s understandable that people started getting angry. Then I heard the rumour that someone had taken a chain saw to the central timber, something I couldn’t believe. I knew that a sample of wood had to be taken to date the wood but, even though I had no respect for EH, I couldn’t believe that they would use a chainsaw to get it. I assumed that if it had been done at all it was by some mad souvenir hunter. And I still didn’t believe it until I went down to the site and saw it with my own eyes.

By that time, the dig had been halted after protesters occupied the site. The protest was effective in making EH realise that the timbers remain sacred to people today and we won’t tolerate them being abused. Kudos to the protesters. But still, I was worried to see people sitting and standing on the timbers, one in particular using the central altar as his platform for his performance to the cameras and tape recorders of the media.

And all this time, the beach was being ignored. Because of the fragile peat deposits it’s become a place where birds from across the world come to feed, rest and breed. For me, this has now become the priority: the timbers are important, but are they more important than the life of an exhausted bird who has flown thousands of miles, trusting that it will find rest and food but is too afraid to land because of the amount of people it finds on the beach? This bird, and thousands of others won’t just pass away peacefully in their sleep but will die of starvation and exhaustion.

There is certainly a solution, and that is for people to share information. This was done on the 22nd June when archaeologists, protesters, wildlife experts and Pagans got together to share their knowledge and standpoints. A point of agreement was reached which meant that although the timbers would be excavated a new structure could be created on the site and that the ancient timbers would be returned to Holme.

Many mistakes have been made on all sides but a positive outcome is entirely possible if only people are willing to learn from each other and have the best interests of the site and of the wildlife at heart. More positively, huge steps forward have been taken by those who believe in peaceful negotiation. Who would have believed that hardboiled scientists and civil servants could join hands in a circle and chant the Awen at the beginning and end of a Talking Stick ceremony?

Norfolk is a testing ground for other sites across the country, perhaps the world. No one point of view can take precedence over another, compromise is always possible, and I believe that it is only this attitude of partnership that can lead to the future of fully rounded and satisfactory excavation and management of sacred sites.

Clare Prout, June 1999