Silbury Hill forum 180 room
Image by D-Rider
Silbury Hill

Grrr​…

close
more_vert
Sanctuary S
Sanctuary Jul 19, 2010 08:32:26
Replying to goffik

goffik wrote:
Not really. I don't understand the mentality of the desire to climb things. Is it because you're not supposed to? Is it like sticking 2 fingers up at the guardians of the site that request that you don't do it? A sort of "Hey, man - these things belong to *all* of us, therefore I'm going to help myself!"?

G x

I guess for a lot of people it's to get a view from the top of Silbury Goff, myself included. When you research and wonder why something was built, like Silbury for instance, you feel it may help that research by climbing to the top to see what it was that may have encouraged the builders to build it in that location. Nobody seems to say anything when archo's climb to the top or when camera crews scale it with all their equipment to make TV documentaries so why not interested people? I think we all take your point exactly about mass invasion of the hill but it's unlikely to happen unless they decide one day to open up a Tesco on the top and take over the car park...now there's a thought!!

L Littlestone
Littlestone Jul 19, 2010 09:31:33
Replying to Sanctuary

I think we all take your point exactly about mass invasion of the hill but it's unlikely to happen...
You're missing the point, you don't need a 'mass invasion' for things (animate or inanimate) to deteriorate to the point of no return (though for the umpteenth time the 'mass invasion' of Stonehenge at solstice time is indefensible). One person a day walking round the Avebury bank will cause as much damage in three months as a hundred people in a single afternoon - it's accumulative! If you doubt that take a look at the ongoing closure of certain sections of the Avebury bank for months at a time so that they can recover.

One first sweep of the plough at the base of a barrow followed by more, one too many footsteps at Saihō-ji, one too many songbirds, one too many of anything because one too many clowns think that their little act of vandalism won't make any difference - it does. Don't do it - period.

M megadread
megadread Jul 19, 2010 18:00:24
Replying to Sanctuary

Sanctuary wrote:
goffik wrote:
Not really. I don't understand the mentality of the desire to climb things. Is it because you're not supposed to? Is it like sticking 2 fingers up at the guardians of the site that request that you don't do it? A sort of "Hey, man - these things belong to *all* of us, therefore I'm going to help myself!"?

G x

I guess for a lot of people it's to get a view from the top of Silbury Goff, myself included. When you research and wonder why something was built, like Silbury for instance, you feel it may help that research by climbing to the top to see what it was that may have encouraged the builders to build it in that location. Nobody seems to say anything when archo's climb to the top or when camera crews scale it with all their equipment to make TV documentaries so why not interested people? I think we all take your point exactly about mass invasion of the hill but it's unlikely to happen unless they decide one day to open up a Tesco on the top and take over the car park...now there's a thought!!
That's why i climbed it, and who's to say it wasn't meant to be climbed anyway. ?
Yeah i understand that if everyone who visited it climbed it there would be damage done so i don't personally encourage people to climb it but i wont "go on one" with people who chosse to do so.

Climbing on stones is another matter, i doubt stonehenge was meant to be climbed.