Vandals in sandals?

close
more_vert
Lianachan L
Lianachan Sep 16, 2005 12:36:01
Replying to Kammer

Indeed. That restoration appears to have been done very sensitively (and quickly!).

My objection is more about re-erecting stones that have fallen some time ago, maybe even in ancient times, than ones which fall over "these days" like your excellently restored example.

D doktoratomik
doktoratomik Sep 16, 2005 12:41:12
Replying to Lianachan

That's a very artifical distinction though. If it's ok to re-erect a stone that fell over yesterday, why's it not ok to re-erect one that fell over four hundred years ago? And where do you draw the line? A hundred years? A thousand years? I think the only sensible approach is to consider each case on its relative merits.

L Lubin
Lubin Sep 16, 2005 19:25:39
Replying to Lianachan

How would the rows and circles on Dartmoor be if it hadn't been for the antiquarians of the late 1900's. They restored most of then by re-erecting the stones. All can say is a thanks to the likes of Robert Burnard and Rev Sabine Baring Gould.

Peace Lubin