close
more_vert

tjj wrote:
harestonesdown wrote:
Well i'm aware it's not natural, much like the slag heaps close to me that have been landscaped, but nonetheless it's still a hill, one i believe was built to be climbed.
Hahaha! I know you like to wind me up from time to time HSD ... comparing Silbury to a slagheap - hehehe!

Nite-nite, that's me done on the subject.

Lol. I'm not winding you up, it's just we have different opinions on Silbury. I just don't get why they'd build so high if it wasn't meant to be a vantage point. This whole "Silbury game" Cope babbles on about just doesn't work for me, it makes no sense. :)

harestonesdown wrote:
tjj wrote:
harestonesdown wrote:
Well i'm aware it's not natural, much like the slag heaps close to me that have been landscaped, but nonetheless it's still a hill, one i believe was built to be climbed.
Hahaha! I know you like to wind me up from time to time HSD ... comparing Silbury to a slagheap - hehehe!

Nite-nite, that's me done on the subject.

Lol. I'm not winding you up, it's just we have different opinions on Silbury. I just don't get why they'd build so high if it wasn't meant to be a vantage point. This whole "Silbury game" Cope babbles on about just doesn't work for me, it makes no sense. :)
Building high is just conspicious construction , nothing to do with being utilitarian , like many of the monuments from the period .

harestonesdown wrote:
...............I just don't get why they'd build so high if it wasn't meant to be a vantage point...........
That is exactly why I think it was built; to be climbed. And the reason was the view over the ancestral landscape, including West and East Kennet long barrows, and the view to Adam's Grave, let alone the Avebury landscape, The Sanctuary, and Windmill Hill.

Doesn't mean a free for all to climb it now. I'd like to see a constructed path winding up to the top for those who wish to go up. That would stop erosion, and comply with the wishes of most people who don't want to see damage to t'Hill.

All the best,
TE.