, , , , , , , , , , , , ,


As you might recall, I had an article about Hardown Hill published towards the end of last year. Out of the blue, I decided to put “Hardown Hill” into Google to see whether the article came up. It did, and it currently holds the third spot.

Wikipedia naturally commanded the top spot. Clicking on the page I noticed that there was very little information about the archaeological finds at the site, only a one-liner explaining how the mounds were thought to be barrows.

I decided, for the first time in my life, to edit a Wikipedia page. I added a few lines about the barrows and the artefacts that were found there in 1916. I also linked to some research on the site, and the prominent interpretations that have been advanced. Finally, I linked to myself:

A recent consideration of the context and a reclassification of the artefacts has cast doubts on the burial interpretation, and has instead interpreted the assemblage as a hoard.

It felt quite nice to contribute some specialist knowledge on a subject to a good cause. Albeit in quite a small way, it was enormously satisfying to support an institution that I feel is possibly one of the greatest education tools ever created.

So I guess that was my good deed for the day. Perhaps you could share a bit of knowledge with the global community some time as well?

Okay, I know – back to the thesis…