Of all the nerve...

[unclehobart]

Priest Proposes 'Adopt-A-Skeleton' Scheme
Wed Jul 24,11:05 AM ET

LONDON (Reuters) - A cash-strapped British vicar is asking his congregation to adopt 1,000-year-old Anglo Saxons at a cost of about $15 a skeleton so that they can be reburied as Christians.

The Reverend Chris Boulton wants to raise the money to bury 670 Anglo Saxons dug up after building work revealed an ancient burial site, The Times reported on Wednesday.

"Common decency and a sense of the importance of our heritage require that we treat these ancestors with respect," the vicar told the newspaper.

Experts said the Saxon remains found near St. Andrew's Church in Cherry Hinton, Cambridge are between 900 and 1,300 years old.

They said the skeletons were probably Christian because they were buried lying from east to west and had no artifacts buried with them,

The vicar said the appeal to raise the $7,900 needed for reburial and the erection of a commemorative stone cross had received a good response.

"I don't think anyone thinks it is too macabre," the vicar was quoted as saying. ($1=.6350 Pound)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=573&ncid=573&e=6&u=/nm/20020724/od_nm/skeletons_dc_1

Probably christian? Such arrogance to post baptise the dead for $? Suppose that they wern't christians. Its a pretty gnarly insult. 'Common decency and heritage... and respect', used in the same thought with digging up corpses and dishing them out like some sort of adopt a highway program mentality? ... jebus save us from the feebleminded.

 

[Professur]

Shaddap, you heathen.

 

[unclehobart]

Suppose they were heathens. Its a little late to 'save' them dontcha think? The only way I would consider such a thing is if it could be proven that they were part of the black plague mass gravings. I can see how proper form goes right out the window at that point. Since there were no artifacts of any kind... what can we draw from that? Not viking.. they used artifacts. I also feel that if it were christian that at least one type of religious article would have been found somewhere in that mass. They didnt speak of there being any evidence of battle trauma to the bones... so I doubt it was a mass battle bury, either roman or saxon. It spoke of a largish period of time for the burials which indicates to me that it wasn't a sudden quick disease bury like the plagues. Prisoners? An anonymous condemed pit for slaves? I wonder if there was any evidence of a warring settlement nearby... either roman, viking, or saxon. If so.. then at least some of them could plausibly be christian as well as explain the lack of artifacts. ...An old pious tribe that didn't believe in burial artifacts perhaps?

Whatcha think?

 

[PT]

I'm just thinking this is another 670 bodies that I really don't think anyone is going to visit their gravestones. Why are we still wasting so much land on graves?

 

[PT]

Isn't land over there in England a little scarce as it is?

 

[ris]

according to my resident archaeologist [who has read the story previously and is a pagan btw so fairly biased you might think]. not finding any grave goods in 670 burials is a very strong indication of christian burials. major conversion in this country happened between 600-800ad so there is room for error in the remains.
for her, the absence of grave goods is a major factor, especailly with such a large number found.

her take on it is that seeing as the bones have been excavated the best place to preserve and protect them would be in the consecrated land of the church they were found. less likelihood of their being robbed or poked at as a result. while imperfect it may additionally hold the best long term solution.

 

[freako104]

he says its not macarbe when hes taking these cadavers(well skeletons) baptising them and giving them a christian burial? hes taking out corpses from theyre own burial site(which is extremly disrespectful on his part) and burying them in a way he sees fit although he assumes(which makes an ass of you and me)theyre christian he doesnt know this. im sure this is some money making scheme he thought up. i hate it when people take advantage of religion for theyre own purpose.

 

[ris]

nowhere in the yahoo piece or the newspaper one my missus read did it mention baptism so i have no idea where that has come from

the way this is written it makes out the vicar dug them up and is now trying to wangle cash to do what he wants with the remains. the article states 'reburied as christians' and then confirms that they were likely to have been buried originally as christians. so therefore, not reburied as a christian, rather reburied, period. it's sloppy journalism written to create something that isn't there.

that's not how it works. the church found them while doing some work. the county archaeologists will have been called into to do the dig and recovery of the bones [they have to, by law]. they date and return information to the parish of what's found.
these people really know their stuff, cambridgeshire is part of east anglia where there are a lot of anglo saxon remains, hordes, villages etc. if they tell him that it is most likely a christian burial then i would believe them.

the reality is that the site was probably a sacred site for christian saxons in the area [the very earliest were often buried away from the set pagan burial areas]. they buried their dead there as it meant something to them, as christian saxons. handed down over the years they would have marked it and quite likely built on it. the reason the church is there could be because of them.

they were buried on that land, possibly the earliest christians and residents of cambridge, and i'm sure they would rather be returned to that ground. where else do they end up? in a box, in a dark room in the cambridge museum. hardly dignified.

 

[kuulani]

We have problems with construction work unearthing burials all the time At least we don't have to pay to adopt skeletons for reburial.

 

[ris]

it's going to be nothing like adopting an animal at teh zoo, don't expect a letter at christmas for starters

 

[unclehobart]

We have problems with construction work unearthing burials all the time At least we don't have to pay to adopt skeletons for reburial.

Yeah... but are they trying to 'christen' the bodies on you?

 

[nalani]

We have problems with construction work unearthing burials all the time At least we don't have to pay to adopt skeletons for reburial.

Yeah... but are they trying to 'christen' the bodies on you?

umm.. hello? we're the Natives in the middle of the Pacific ... they've been trying to christen everything around here ... remember?

we don't pay for "adoption" of skeletal remains because if repatriation needs to occur, we take care of it ourselves .. in a culturally correct manner ... difference is, we know what are Native burials and what aren't ....

 

[ris]

the archaeologists are pretty certain of what burials are what here too, the number they have uncovered gives their knowledge base good grounding. 30 miles east of cambridge is west stowe, a reconstructed saxon village onthe site of one excavated int eh 1960s and 70s, nearby was found the sutton hoo treasure [likely to be one of the last pagan saxon kings and some fabulous grave goods]. to the north flag fen a sacred marshland site.

they know their stuff and i would trust their judgement, and it is theirs not the vicars that is in question if any. the 'adoption' is just a way to pay for returning these remains to the place they were buried. there's no talk of christening them, merely reburial and the erection of a stone cross.