Fair point, but no Atlanteans involved. It was built on marshy ground very close to the sea. Sea levels rise and fall. I'm not sure that time-tourists like us being able to see Seahenge is what's really important. Just as I'm glad that East Kennet hasn't been excavated and tarted up with concrete and a glass roof and Silbury hasn't been stripped back to its chalk skeleton etc etc. Some things should be left intacto.
Do we have to dig up everything and put it in a glass case or behind bars to appreciate it? The sea and the mud preserved Seahenge for 3000+ years and would continue to do so - those timbers went a long way down into the preserving mud. Will any museum keep its parts for that long? The whole is far greater than the sum of the parts.
 Reply | with quote | Posted by PeterH
20th October 2005ce
21:30 |
Seahenge...... (dee, Oct 20, 2005, 13:00)- Re: Seahenge...... (Kid Calamity, Oct 20, 2005, 13:05)
- Re: Seahenge...... (juamei, Oct 20, 2005, 13:16)
- Re: Seahenge...... (PeterH, Oct 20, 2005, 13:38)
- Re: Seahenge...... (Wild Wooder, Oct 20, 2005, 14:14)
- Re: Seahenge...... (nigelswift, Oct 20, 2005, 14:41)
- Re: Seahenge...... (PeterH, Oct 20, 2005, 17:46)
- Re: Seahenge...... (Littlestone, Oct 20, 2005, 20:37)
- Re: Seahenge...... (PeterH, Oct 20, 2005, 21:30)
- Re: Seahenge...... (Littlestone, Oct 20, 2005, 14:57)
- Re: Seahenge...... (juamei, Oct 21, 2005, 08:09)
- Re: Seahenge...... (fitzcoraldo, Oct 20, 2005, 14:24)
- Re: Seahenge...... (baza, Oct 20, 2005, 15:27)
- Re: Seahenge...... (BuckyE, Oct 21, 2005, 06:37)
|
|
Head To Head 
Re: Seahenge...... (Littlestone)