The Modern Antiquarian. Stone Circles, Ancient Sites, Neolithic Monuments, Ancient Monuments, Prehistoric Sites, Megalithic MysteriesThe Modern Antiquarian

Head To Head   The Modern Antiquarian   Silbury Hill Forum Start a topic | Search
Silbury Hill
Re: hmmm.
194 messages
Select a forum:
moss wrote:
Mustard wrote:
[But not everyone appreciates the consequences of their actions. I imagine that it's simply never occurred to many people that a bloody great big hill like Silbury is actually suffering from structural problems. Sure, I imagine there's a few selfish people who would just climb it regardless, but it's not a good idea to assume that everyone is that way inclined. I've had friendly chats with people in the past who I've seen behaving in inappropriate ways, and often, they've not understood why their behaviour was a problem until it's been explained reasonably to them. I find it often helps to look for the best in people rather than assuming that you'll find the worst.


An argument that goes on for ever! Surely a large sign at the bottom of Silbury and a fence round it tells people that this hill is not for climbing should suffice.
Its impossible for you or anyone else to stand guard under Silbury having friendly chats with people saying 'please do not climb'. But perfectly logical to expect people not to climb with a well worded permanent sign that tells them NOT to.....


I would think you could put up as many signs as you could find room for...electrify the fence...lay landmines and have ya snipers waiting to pick them off, but you'll always get someone who doesnt care a stuff and has no regard for authority whatsoever who will walk up the hill. I'm glad I went up there, claimed my biscuit...kept one in safe-keeping for Nigel later on when he has a moment of weakness...and went up while it was not such a big issue. There are things in this world much much more important than Silbury Hill (and I'm it's number one fan) which involved real living people who are really suffering. Maybe we should all spare a thought for them now and again instead of just worrying about a lump of chalk and earth that will still be there for another 4,500 years if the archo's promise to leave it alone! THEY are responsible for it's part demise NOT Joe Public.

End of rant!


Reply | with quote
Posted by Sanctuary
20th July 2010ce
17:29

In reply to:

Re: hmmm. (moss)

1 reply:

Re: hmmm. (nigelswift)

Messages in this topic: