Silbury Hill forum 180 room
Image by Cursuswalker
Silbury Hill

Grrr​…

close
more_vert
faerygirl F
faerygirl Jul 21, 2010 12:17:14
Replying to megadread

megadread wrote:
As we're discussing walking / climbing up / on ancient monuments, what about walking the West Kennet avenue. ?
Anyone.
Well it doesnt really damage the stones to walk on the avenue. And its pretty likely thats what the avenue was for. But (in much the same way) if it was decended upon by hundreds of people all at once I'm sure there would be a certain amount of damamge done. Same as anything I Would say; Be as respectful as you can.

x

S Sanctuary
Sanctuary Jul 21, 2010 12:38:42
Replying to faerygirl

faerygirl wrote:
megadread wrote:
As we're discussing walking / climbing up / on ancient monuments, what about walking the West Kennet avenue. ?
Anyone.
Well it doesnt really damage the stones to walk on the avenue. And its pretty likely thats what the avenue was for. But (in much the same way) if it was decended upon by hundreds of people all at once I'm sure there would be a certain amount of damamge done. Same as anything I Would say; Be as respectful as you can.

x

I'm sure I read somewhere recently that the 'roadway' between the stones had lowered over the years and the stones now becoming 'banked' up.

M megadread
megadread Jul 21, 2010 12:45:34
Replying to faerygirl

Well i'm assuming silbury would have only been climbed by a special few when it was an "active" site and maybe the avenue was treated the same, walking it could be just as disrespectful as climbing Silbury, just a thought.

Wasn't there evidence of compaction outside the avenue suggesting this was the case. ?

T thesweetcheat
thesweetcheat Jul 21, 2010 17:50:11
Replying to faerygirl

faerygirl wrote:
megadread wrote:
As we're discussing walking / climbing up / on ancient monuments, what about walking the West Kennet avenue. ?
Anyone.
Well it doesnt really damage the stones to walk on the avenue.
Perhaps if you leap from stone to stone, never touching the floor?