|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian Silbury Hill Forum | Start a topic | Search |
80 messages | Select a forum: |
Littlestone wrote: Protecting, monitoring and educating about those "little" sites is essential (to my mind, more essential) as concerns over the latest person to climb Silbury or build a house a few hundred yards from Avebury's banks. Oh come off it tsc – more essential? Of course protecting, monitoring and educating Joe about "little" sites is essential but Silbury, as the largest manmade structure in Europe, is in a monumental complexity class of it’s own and rightly deserves super protecting, monitoring and the better education of its present guardians – ie the present generation. Ditto Avebury. If new houses and disrespect (in the form of tat, fast-food outlets, climbing on stones, etc, etc etc) are allowed at these two iconic sites what chance do other little sites stand. We'll have to disagree I'm afraid. My own opinion is that far too much time is spent worrying about Silbury, while 1,000s (literally) of other sites are being destroyed continually, gradually. I'd rather we saved 1,000 sites of varying typology, dates, settings, construction, etc, than one big mound. Those 1,000 sites will ultimately tell us more about prehistory in this country than any number of "new" research papers about Silbury. (Clearly we'd preserve both, wouldn't we!)  This topic is locked |  30th August 2012ce 19:42 In reply to: Re: When she stands on Silbury Hill (Littlestone) |
Messages in this topic: |
|