"We shouldn't re-erect the stones because too many people will come, and that will spoil things"
the above to kernelise what you say Pete?
I made my first visit to Avebury earlier this year, thanks to the relocation of Tim and Lesley. It was 'king brilliant to be there, to see what I'd only read about previosly, to meet you and other megalithomaniacs.
Prior to the visit, I had a romantic notion that all these old rocks had stood for millenia, a mute witness to all manner of change.
I found that there would have been no Avebury if it hadn't been for the efforts of dedicated antiquarians. I was lucky to have such an informative and enthusiatic guide.
We walked across a field, ignorant to the stones until the knapped flints were pointed out.
Well, I'm a nobody. Not in any self-denigrating sense, but in the sense that I have no strong religious belief. I was merely interested, because I accumulate knowledge, as a sponge accumulates water. People like me cause damage just by our presence. Our cars wear the roads, our feet wear th banks, our money warps the local economy, even if we only buy a postcard.
Yet I AM interested. The stones are the nearest thing that I, a confirmed atheist, come to spirituality.
I think that what I'm trying to say is that Avebury is a special place, and that if there's one part of England that should be preserved, then Avebury is it. But I also accept that such a small habitation needs protection from erosion, both physical and cultural.
My answer lies in such things as the PeteG 360 degree panoramic wossnames, and the internet.
No. It can't compete.
Yes. It will draw people in on it's own account.
Yet if you take the argument back 100 years, then you'd have a peaceful avebury with no stones.
I don't think that would be what anyone wants either.
