The Ethics of Racist Monuments

In this chapter we focus on the debate over publicly-maintained racist monuments as it manifests in the mid-2010s Anglosphere, primarily in the US (chiefly regarding the over 700 monuments devoted to the Confederacy), but to some degree also in Britain and Commonwealth countries, especially South Africa (chiefly regarding monuments devoted to figures and events associated with colonialism and apartheid). After pointing to some representative examples of racist monuments, we discuss ways a monument can be thought racist, and neutrally categorize removalist and preservationist arguments heard in the monument debate. We suggest that both extremist and moderate removalist goals are likely to be self-defeating, and that when concerns of civic sustainability are put on moral par with those of fairness and justice, something like a Mandela-era preservationist policy is best: one which removes the most offensive of the minor racist monuments, but which focuses on closing the monumentary gap between peoples and reframing existing racist monuments

The Virginia Monument’s Meaning in Memory

In the early 1900s, many people began to advocate for Confederate monuments on the battlefield at Gettysburg. However, different motivations were present. Many Northerners saw Confederate monuments as a way to further unity, while Southerners instead used the monuments to preserve a separate identity. The Virginia Memorial is a clear case of this

North Africa American Cemetery and Memorial

After the end of World War II a survey made jointly by representatives of the Secretary of War and the American Battle Monuments Commission revealed that all of the sites of the temporary cemeteries established in North Africa during the war had major disadvantages. The present new site was therefore selected and was established in 1948. It lay in the sector of the British First Army which liberated the Tunis area in May 1943. Here rest 2,840 of our Military Dead, representing 39 percent of the burials which were originally made in 4 North Africa and also in Iran. A high proportion of these gave their lives in the landings in, and occupation of, Morocco and Algeria, and subsequent fighting which culminated in the liberation of Tunisia. Others died as a result of accident or sickness in these and other parts of North Africa, or while serving in the Persian Gulf Command in Iran.https://digicom.bpl.lib.me.us/books_pubs/1114/thumbnail.jp

Damage index for stone monuments

Precise diagnosis is required for characterisation, interpretation, rating and prediction of the weathering damages at stone monuments and is vital for remedy of stone damages and sustainable monument preservation. Quantitative rating of damages represents an important scientific contribution to reliable damage diagnosis at stone monuments. Damage indices are introduced as new tool for scientific quantification and rating of stone damages. Application of damage indices improves stone damage diagnosis and is very suitable for evaluation and certification of preservation measures and for long-term survey and maintenance of stone monuments. Importance and use of damage indices are presented for monuments in Germany, Malta, Jordan, Egypt and Brazil.peer-reviewe

A Case for Removing Confederate Monuments

A particularly important, pressing, philosophical question concerns whether Confederate monuments ought to be removed. More precisely, one may wonder whether a certain group, viz. the relevant government officials and members of the public who together can remove the Confederate monuments, are morally obligated to (of their own volition) remove them. Unfortunately, academic philosophers have largely ignored this question. This paper aims to help rectify this oversight by moral philosophers. In it, I argue that people have a moral obligation to remove most, if not all, public Confederate monuments because of the unavoidable harm they inflict on undeserving persons. In the first section, I provide some relevant historical context. In the second section, I make my unique harm-based argument for the removal of Confederate monuments. In the third section, I consider and rebut five objections

A chronology of the Scythian antiquities of Eurasia based on new archaeological and C-14 data

The paper is compares the chronology of the monuments of the Scythian epoch located in the east and west of the Eurasian steppe zone on the basis of both archaeological and radiocarbon data. The lists of C-14 dates for the monuments located in different parts of Eurasia are presented according to the periods of their existence. Generally, the C-14 dates are confirmed the archaeological point of view and allow us to compare the chronological position of the European and Asian Scythian monuments on the united C-14 time scale

Megaliths, monuments and materiality

Stones, and especially the arrangement of large stones in relation to one another, have long been the focus of attention in megalith studies, a concern reflected in the name itself. It is, however, a blinkered view. Many so-called megalithic monuments embody other carefully selected materials in their construction, including turf, soil, rubble, and timber. In considering long barrows, Paul Ashbee noted that it was a false distinction to separate earthen long barrows from stone-chambered long barrows as the builders of long barrows inevitably used materials available within their local environments. Alternatively, writing mainly about the Irish material, Arthur ApSimon suggested a development from timber to stone implying an onological progression in the preferred use of materials. Whether environmental or evolutionary, it is certain that many monuments interchangeably combine stone and wood in their construction in a way that forces us to consider what these and other materials meant to the megalith builders. Was it simply about what was available? Or what was fashionable? Or were there deeper sets of meanings relating to how different materials were perceived and understood within the cosmological systems that lie behind the design, construction,and use of long barrows, passage graves, dolmens and other related monuments? Focusing upon wood and stone, it is argued here that both were components of a cyclical world view of life and death that was embedded in the fabric and structure of monuments

Some problems in the study of the chronology of the ancient nomadic cultures in Eurasia (9th - 3rd centuries BC)

This research is focused on the chronological investigations of ancient nomads belonging to the Scythian cultures which occupied the steppe and forest-steppe zones of Eurasia during the 9th-3rd centuries BC. The 14C dates for the pre-scythian and early scythian time in both Europe and Asia are presented and compared to their chronological position based on archaeological evidence. The first 14C dates have been produced for the Scythian time monuments located in the Lower Volga River basin, Urals and Transurals regions. Their chronological positions are compared with the position of the monuments of Southern Siberia and Central Asia. It was shown that the nomadic cultures belonging to the Scythian culture began to exist over the wide territory of Eurasia from the 9th-8th centuries cal BC and there are some monuments which may be synchronous to the Arzhan royal barrow (the oldest monument known). A list of new 14C dates and a map of the monuments are presented