Removing Graffiti

Peter Burgess

New member
Graffiti is one of the few things which we either want to preserve or to remove as unsightly damage. If an inscription dates from, say, the 19th century, and was written by a casual visitor to a cave or mine, my guess is that most of us would be keen to preserve it. What about stuff from the 1920s? 1950s? 1970s? Where does graffiti cease to be interesting and start to be unsightly? If you think the 1950s, say, is borderline, then why did you choose that decade as the boundary?

Last night I was recording chalk inscriptions on the walls of old quarry workings, which were probably written in the 16th century. Many of these marks are no more than crosses, or simple symbols that often look like random scribbles. However, it is likely that they were made as a means of protection, similar old symbols being found in natural caves in Somerset, and which have been interpreted as ritual protection marks.

Several of these marks have been part-removed or smudged in recent years, probably by cavers keen to remove what appear to be modern way-finding marks.

I suppose my suggestion is that we should never attempt to remove graffiti unless we are absolutely certain that it is of no historical importance.

A few years ago, we lost some rare inscriptions dating from 1911 as a result of over-zealous graffiti removal.

Any thoughts?
 

SamT

Moderator
Your right - I was actually interested in reading the various scribbles on the wall in the West chamber of Oxlow. There was all sorts of stuff of varying vintage. Even a few names I recognised.

think about stuff like "the miners toast" in speedwell. And the soot initials you find in most derbyshire lead mines. Fascinating - but all started out as graffiti.

What about AI passage in Peak/speedwell and how that helped unlock the secrets of the the leviathan.

Whilst I would never condone the writing of graffiti now, and certainly not the ususal crap you see written, historical stuff can be very important.

I generally find sweet wrappers and carbide soot far more offensive.
 
D

darkplaces

Guest
Its a major problem in the Corsham Quarrys.

What really annoys me is these idiots write OVER something else. If they found a small space, unwritten on and didnt use foot high letters in spray can red but wrote the date and names in smaller format I would not take issue with that. However if I found them or the group was with me I would not allow them to do it. We dont want lots just a few modern markings.

As some have infurred todays markings are tomorrows history.
 

graham

New member
IIRC the Yanks use a rolling fifty year cut-off, which is as arbitrary as anything else but at least has the advantage of consistency.

But as far as I'm concerned, if it ain't 10,000 years old at least, then I just ain't interested. ;)
 

gus horsley

New member
I suppose it's down to what the graffiti says, rather than it's age. If it's an eighteenth century miner's initials, then it's useful dating evidence. But if it says "Baz woz ere" in 2ft letters I would be inclined to remove it.

Gus
 
D

darkplaces

Guest
gus horsley said:
I suppose it's down to what the graffiti says, rather than it's age. If it's an eighteenth century miner's initials, then it's useful dating evidence. But if it says "Baz woz ere" in 2ft letters I would be inclined to remove it.

Gus
What about porn from WW2?

Ridge, near Corsham was a normal stone quarry taken over by the military to store ammunition, it became part of the CAD. Its like a gallery of things written on the walls including lots of drawings of a rude nature and downright porno! It also has an amazing drawing of the queen mary.

Some pictures here but it seams nobody has taken pictures of the rude images; apart from the bird with the 3d boobs and blue hair.
http://www.c**tplaces.co.uk/phpBB2/album_cat.php?cat_id=132
 
D

darkplaces

Guest
Peter Burgess said:
including lots of drawings of a rude nature and downright porno! It also has an amazing drawing of the queen mary.
And what, pray, is the queen mary doing?
lol - oh you had me giggling with that one. Nothing rude, the Queen Mary Boat! a fine drawing, in the area they started to corset the pillars in cement but ran out of money.
 

gus horsley

New member
[quote="c**tplaces
What about porn from WW2?

/quote]

Well, I suppose they've got a historical context. Maybe they shouldn't remove similar stuff from public bog doors?

Gus
 
M

Moonraker

Guest
Peter Burgess said:
Graffiti is one of the few things which we either want to preserve or to remove as unsightly damage. If an inscription dates from, say, the 19th century, and was written by a casual visitor to a cave or mine, my guess is that most of us would be keen to preserve it. What about stuff from the 1920s? 1950s? 1970s? Where does graffiti cease to be interesting and start to be unsightly? If you think the 1950s, say, is borderline, then why did you choose that decade as the boundary?

Last night I was recording chalk inscriptions on the walls of old quarry workings, which were probably written in the 16th century. Many of these marks are no more than crosses, or simple symbols that often look like random scribbles. However, it is likely that they were made as a means of protection, similar old symbols being found in natural caves in Somerset, and which have been interpreted as ritual protection marks.

Several of these marks have been part-removed or smudged in recent years, probably by cavers keen to remove what appear to be modern way-finding marks.

I suppose my suggestion is that we should never attempt to remove graffiti unless we are absolutely certain that it is of no historical importance.

A few years ago, we lost some rare inscriptions dating from 1911 as a result of over-zealous graffiti removal.

Any thoughts?
As someone with an interest in researching ritual protective marks such as these I think it is great that you raise this important issue.

Often what may be considered deleterious at the time may well prove of interest, or indeed as in the case of rock art for example (cup and ring marks etc) some of the only records of early human development.
Already anthro-archeologists are studying 'modern' graffiti and moves are made to preserve the better examples.

One aspect of the more modern variety, apart from the unsightliness (or our contemporary view of it as such) of spray painted or similar 'tags' is not just the visual intrusion, but the fact that such forms of graffiti are likely to be less permanent than the 'traditional' engraving in stone etc. But considering that Peter is recording chalked marks from the C16th then perhaps it is less of an issue in a cave environment!

I guess some very old cave art is on a large scale (Lascure here in France for example covers whole walls) so perhaps in 100-1,000 years time archaeologists will be writing books about the Cave Graffiti Art of the C21st :wink:

In the end it is a personal judgement call but I would agree with most opinion here about most modern examples being intrusive and detracting from a precious part of our shared heritage. But perhaps in certain contexts it may be appropriate to leave it.

--------------

On the actual marks Peter, I would love to hear more about them. I will pm you on that.

One other cave site graffiti which has been identified and researched in some depth springs to mind. In this case it is incised in the rock so survived well intentioned work to remove more modern stuff. The site is probably known to you, that is Goatchurch Cavern at BurringtonCombe, North Somerset. Details were printed in the caving press. Details:

A BRIEF SUMMARY OF POINTS FOUND IN
"RITUAL PROTECTION MARKS IN GOATCHURCH CAVERN,
BURRINGTON COMBE, NORTH SOMERSET.
University of Bristol Spelaeological Society, Vol 23, No.2, 2004: ISSN 0373-7527
by
C.J. BINDING and L.J. WILSON

There is a web page with details including a photo from this article on the excellent 'Apotropaios' web site here:

Goatchurch Cavern marks

And of course the 13,000 year old rock art at Creswell Crags, the earliest recorded in the UK.

If you know of any other similar marking sites in caves I would be very glad to hear about them.

Simon
 

graham

New member
Simon

We have probable apopotraic marks in another couple of caves, as well. These are not yet published, but we intend so doing as soon as recording is complete.

If you have any other examples we (Linda, Chris B. & myself) would be grateful to hear about them.
 
M

Moonraker

Guest
graham said:
Simon

We have probable apopotraic marks in another couple of caves, as well. These are not yet published, but we intend so doing as soon as recording is complete.

If you have any other examples we (Linda, Chris B. & myself) would be grateful to hear about them.
Graham,

Firstly I quite a bit of data for apotropaic symbols specifically from buildings and from the Early to Late Medieval period but an also interested in all sorts of graffiti (being marks on stone, wood, generally engraved rather than painted). I am also interested in rock art and cave paintings but not an expert on Prehistory. And not just apotropaic or ritual protection marks but ALL types of marks, there origins and potential cognitive significance.

This is basically because there is not a great volume of study of this type of folk magic and it is not possible to be categoric, although interest has increased over the last 10-15 years and there is some pretty well informed opinion available.

As to other examples of this type of apotropaic marking, examples do occur but are not widely recorded or documented and I suspect in cave situations very little is available. The web site linked above does have quite a bit of general info and pointers to available sources. I only heard myself about the Goatchurch Cavern marks from my friend who rune that site recently. He has wide experience in this field and did not know of any other examples in caves.

But Creswell Grag just shows that until people start to take notice then things go unnoticed. There was a telling post about these very first examples of rock art (they are not painted but engraved, as are over 90% of all such examples) which touches on the subject of this thread:

The artwork was not invisible - no one had noticed it. No cave art had been discovered in Britain before, so it seems that no one had bothered to look.
Having said that, someone must have seen it, as one animal has had a beard added to it in recent times, with other nearby graffiti saying "P.M. 1940".
The article describes the cave art as "paintings". They are not paintings, they are engravings.
I took the opportunity to go and have a look and am still in wonderment as to what I have seen. The rock art specialists were in the caves during my visit and found even more engravings while I was there!
source: http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=2146411534

I think this typifies just how people are compelled to record things in this way across 10's of thousands of years. Even in this very important site, a mark left in 1940 already has some historic significance. And the spray painted beard on the 13,000 year old ibex itself shows that casual visitors had most likely 'seen' this treasure before the experts arrived ;)

So I am afraid I do not have many more cave specific examples as such but am happy to provide feedback on any examples and how these may relate to possible apotropaic or ritual or some other symbolism.

From quite a few years of experience crawling around churches and other stone buildings looking for the slightest of scratched marks, over time you begin to filter all the odd marks from all sorts of actions, both accidental, incidental or deliberate. I am sure that you are in a great position to begin to uncover not just potential headline grabbing finds such as at Creswell Crag but equally important, records of past habitation and use. And the more such marks are recorded and are made available to others then the more we will learn and understand them.

There is one 'cave' which has loads of medieval period carving and incised marks of all sorts, a lot religious, possibly pagan. It is not a cave in the classic sense ( probably man made, possibly Brito-Roman, probably later, but is called such and will give you some idea of just how diverse and intriguing graffiti can be. It's name is Royston Cave in Royston Hertfordshire, 40km N of London at the crossing of two Roman roads: the Icknield Way and Ermine Street. There is some decent info and images on this web site:

Royston Cave: creating a medieval magical centre

From the title you can tell it attracts lots of speculation as to it's origins!

There is some more detailed info on the Show cave web site here:

Royston Cave

To understand better the marks found it is important to consider the context and all the possible purposes or reasons why the marks were made (habitation, religious/ shamanistic, industry, exploratitive, casual etc) Also any archaeological evidence which might help date any such finds. Also I find that, whilst being circumspect, local folklore and legends or even toponomy of the location and specific cave names can sometimes offer leads.

Dating is always going to be tough especially where you have no backstop for dating from a cave wall, unless you can use sophisticated techniques to analyse them such as uranium series dating! But shape, method of incising or marking and style can give some idea.

With mining activity you will get evidence of marks from working and also possibly signs directly related to the activity. This can date back right to the Neolithic! A good example would be Grimes Graves in Norfolk where evidence of ritualistic activity related to the mining of flint (invocations made for a good seam of decent flint or plain good safety! for example), including graffiti and other items.
The shaft known as Pit 2 was also excavated by Peake in the same campaign in 1914-15 and reopened by the British Museum in 1975. Again the shaft was 9m deep, and as in Pit 1, a number of hearths were found in the fill of the shaft. Many layers of this backfill produced animal bones, indicating feasting or offerings placed in the mineshaft. Midway down, the jumbled remains of a female skeleton was found, but it is unclear whether this was a post-Neolithic burial near the shaft disturbed at the time of excavation, or a casual Neolithic interment thrown into the shaft.

A hearth was discovered at the base of the shaft, while a chalk and sand platform was found abutting the north-east wall. On the shaft wall near the platform, a group of vertical incised lines was found which would have been lit by the sun's rays at midday. These were interpreted as a 'sundial'. A second graffito - a lattice design - was found on another part of the shaft wall, and this was thought to be a group of 'tally marks' scratched by the miners as they counted flint nodules. Ten galleries radiated out from the base of this shaft. Later Neolithic Grooved Ware pottery was found in various galleries and at the base of the shaft, and several galleries produced bat remains.
source: http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba72/feat2.shtml

This shows two practical explanations for such graffiti and also other associated ritual activity. In fact I have found tally marks on all sorts of buildings, from churches to barns and they may possibly be the earliest forms of human 'writing' or at least cognitive notation.

Finally, as I touched on above, if you consider that over 90% of all rock art/ cave art is engraved, then consideration should be given to careful checking before any well intentioned cleaning of modern graffiti etc so that it may not be lost. There are methods of surveying which can help 'see' the marks (cross lighting the rock face often helps define incised marks with some shadow relief and for recording them (light marking could be erased easily if the rock is of a soft nature etc)

Whether it is parietal art or other forms of graffiti, there must be so much more out there to discover and to understand. With the former, there is a lot of interest and good reference material. For the later I suspect it is only just beginning.

Please feel free to PM me and I would be happy to help with my thoughts etc. And I will keep an eye out for further examples as I intend to follow up such subterranean locations. I would be very interested to hear more about your work.

Cheers
Simon
 
H

hole_in_the_rock

Guest
Peter Burgess said:
Graffiti is one of the few things which we either want to preserve or to remove as unsightly damage. If an inscription dates from, say, the 19th century, and was written by a casual visitor to a cave or mine, my guess is that most of us would be keen to preserve it. What about stuff from the 1920s? 1950s? 1970s? Where does graffiti cease to be interesting and start to be unsightly? If you think the 1950s, say, is borderline, then why did you choose that decade as the boundary?

Last night I was recording chalk inscriptions on the walls of old quarry workings, which were probably written in the 16th century. Many of these marks are no more than crosses, or simple symbols that often look like random scribbles. However, it is likely that they were made as a means of protection, similar old symbols being found in natural caves in Somerset, and which have been interpreted as ritual protection marks.

Several of these marks have been part-removed or smudged in recent years, probably by cavers keen to remove what appear to be modern way-finding marks.

I suppose my suggestion is that we should never attempt to remove graffiti unless we are absolutely certain that it is of no historical importance.

A few years ago, we lost some rare inscriptions dating from 1911 as a result of over-zealous graffiti removal.

Any thoughts?

Lots of thoughts:
1) Is this graffiti on your property?if not
2) Is it on property that you are legally responsible for? if not
3) Is it on property that you are legally allowed to visit? if not
4) Is the owner of the property concerned at the graffiti? and if so
5) Are you responsible (legally) for it's removal? if not
6) Is the owner aware that you wish to remove the gaffiti?

Your suggestion that "we" do not attempt to remove graffiti is possibly the most sensible suggestion yet. If it's not your graffiti or property and you are not responsible for it...leave it alone or ask the owner's permission first.

Another thought is about the way that you say that "we lost some rare" etc.
You did not lose them, they were destroyed, after all, you are hardly likely to find them again, therefore they are not lost.
 
D

darkplaces

Guest
Dear 'hole in my head'

Your obvious tanted and loaded answer doesnt address the fact that if some places are not looked after by people who may not own the land but care for what lies under it then these places may simply be locked away as 'centers of vandalism'. The BAT people start getting twitchy who then start making the likes of English Nature twitchy and before long you find places that have been open to the public for over 30 years suddenly have gates! I am using the Box Freestone example. Were people have drawn Graffiti and set fires which results in a restruction of some kind. Owners of these types of places (like box) dont care, its just an old mine, but to us a tresured place. So if the owner doesnt mind people visiting places (30 years would be a long time not to notice in the case of box) the owner doesnt care about Graffiti being removed as the owner would not know about its application to start with.

Ownership of the land doesnt imply ownership of whats under the land. A cave is a natural thing not man made so nobody actually owns the cave. Only the access point may be owned by the land owner, so if access isnt restricted then what ever happens inside is not of the 'land owners' concern.
 

Peter Burgess

New member
Mr H

The only graffiti I specifically mentioned are chalk marks which are in all likelihood of historical importance. I have no intention of removing any of it. If you look closely at what I wrote, I wrote in general terms, and used a specific instance as an example. So I cannot answer your questions, except for the specific case that I described, where, yes I do have permission to visit the site, and I and my colleagues have an understanding with the owners of the site to do our best to conserve it.

With regard to your comments on the lost 1911 graffiti, I think that everyone else on this forum is totally aware of what I meant by the word 'lost'. This thread is to discuss the value or otherwise of inscriptions underground, and not to discuss semantics.
 

cap n chris

Well-known member
If we change the topic of this thread it is easy to see how childish things are becoming......

"Lots of thoughts:
1) Is this litter on your property?if not
2) Is it on property that you are legally responsible for? if not
3) Is it on property that you are legally allowed to visit? if not
4) Is the owner of the property concerned about the rubbish? and if so
5) Are you responsible (legally) for it's removal? if not
6) Is the owner aware that you wish to remove the litter?

If it's not your litter or property and you are not responsible for it...leave it alone or ask the owner's permission first."

Hmmm.... :roll:
Give it enough time and litter becomes archaeology; in the meantime it simply remains litter. Give it enough time and graffiti become archaeology; in the meantime they simply remain graffiti.
 

graham

New member
c**tplaces said:
Ownership of the land doesnt imply ownership of whats under the land. A cave is a natural thing not man made so nobody actually owns the cave. Only the access point may be owned by the land owner, so if access isnt restricted then what ever happens inside is not of the 'land owners' concern.

In law completely and utterly wrong. If you own the surface then under English (and Welsh) law you own down to the centre of the earth.

Anyway, the land is a completely "natural thing" and someone owns that, so you are wrong in logic as well as in law.
 
Top