|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Silbury Hill » Trespass on SSSI sites |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Sep 06, 2012, 17:19
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: Littlestone wrote: PS I don’t envy Sanctuary coming back to this lot ;-) Ha, the poor sod won't know where to start! He's in the best place at the moment as far as i'm concerned. :) btw, just to clarify that, I mean best place as in out in the field with the monuments, not the fact that I don't want to see him here! phew.. you do have to be careful.
|
|||
|
VBB 558 posts |
Sep 06, 2012, 17:42
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: Littlestone wrote: PS I don’t envy Sanctuary coming back to this lot ;-) Ha, the poor sod won't know where to start! He's in the best place at the moment as far as i'm concerned. :) btw, just to clarify that, I mean best place as in out in the field with the monuments, not the fact that I don't want to see him here! phew.. you do have to be careful. Although there have been some unacceptable personal attacks on here, those aside, I have always thought the jousting that boils over is an illustration of the passion the public feels over particular monuments. It is no accident that the threads that go overboard are nearly always Silbury related.
|
|||
bladup 1986 posts |
Sep 06, 2012, 17:47
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: Littlestone wrote: PS I don’t envy Sanctuary coming back to this lot ;-) Ha, the poor sod won't know where to start! He's in the best place at the moment as far as i'm concerned. :) btw, just to clarify that, I mean best place as in out in the field with the monuments, not the fact that I don't want to see him here! phew.. you do have to be careful. I know you were joking but let's get this straight - Nobody has to be careful what they say on here, we all have opinions and thought's on things that are different to lots of other people on here and in live, nobody's right or wrong because we could all be wrong or because some things do not have to be right or wrong, we should celebrate our diversity not kick other peoples head in with it, We all care pretty much the same i imagine, i just think some of the older people should know better, and realise that some rules are there to be broken, as i'm sure they did in the past, one of the main reasons i feel like this is because the custodians at these place do rubbish jobs most of the time, take skara brae when i went in there was nothing to stop us, the place didn't feel that cared for to me, and the other places as well, it's all about making money, not caring for the place, if it was all about caring for the places i would be different, it's not, its about money, 70000 people to skara brae at ??? each time [ does anybody know how much? ] and every year, then think about how much stonehenge or newgrange makes!!! it's all about money not caring, the dome at cairnapple is there to make historic scotland money, it's not to protect, as they know the dome itself is rotting the stones.
|
|||
|
bladup 1986 posts |
Sep 06, 2012, 17:56
|
||
|
VBB wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: Littlestone wrote: PS I don’t envy Sanctuary coming back to this lot ;-) Ha, the poor sod won't know where to start! He's in the best place at the moment as far as i'm concerned. :) btw, just to clarify that, I mean best place as in out in the field with the monuments, not the fact that I don't want to see him here! phew.. you do have to be careful. Although there have been some unacceptable personal attacks on here, those aside, I have always thought the jousting that boils over is an illustration of the passion the public feels over particular monuments. It is no accident that the threads that go overboard are nearly always Silbury related. Which is strange as the one thing everyone seems to agree on is that archaeologists have done hugely more damage than anyone's feet, maybe we're all just heartbroken with what they've done to the place over the years, i for one believed it was ever so close to total collapse a few years ago, and none of that has anything to do with peoples feet, silbury is our national shame in the same way newgrange is ireland's, silbury even makes it look like they did a good job with newgrange [ which they didn't!!!].
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Sep 06, 2012, 18:27
|
||
Think East Kennet Long Barrow and Waden Mound are also on private land (and presumably shouldn’t be accessed without permission). tsk... so come on, fes up, how many of us have been there (for the 'right' reasons of course :-) and done that.
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Sep 06, 2012, 18:53
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: Think East Kennet Long Barrow and Waden Mound are also on private land (and presumably shouldn’t be accessed without permission). tsk... so come on, fes up, how many of us have been there (for the 'right' reasons of course :-) and done that. Fwiw , I've spent my life trespassing , it was often the only way prior to right to roam to access many hills . The smaller private estates with no right to roam access are and were great places for wild life simply because are few punters .However I don't see that as being the same as wandering through someone's back garden , trampling on crops , interfering with individuals and small communities livelihood ,even though you may find it distasteful in the case of shooting estates etc . or causing potential damage to a building or site .
|
|||
tjj 3606 posts |
Sep 06, 2012, 19:00
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Littlestone wrote: Think East Kennet Long Barrow and Waden Mound are also on private land (and presumably shouldn’t be accessed without permission). tsk... so come on, fes up, how many of us have been there (for the 'right' reasons of course :-) and done that. Fwiw , I've spent my life trespassing , it was often the only way prior to right to roam to access many hills . The smaller private estates with no right to roam access are and were great places for wild life simply because are few punters .However I don't see that as being the same as wandering through someone's back garden , trampling on crops , interfering with individuals and small communities livelihood ,even though you may find it distasteful in the case of shooting estates etc . or causing potential damage to a building or site . Of course, of course - haven't we all. I've lost the plot with this thread and stopped reading it quite a lot earlier in the day. Just to reiterate though I started this thread to finish saying something about Silbury - I think everyone here is in agreement that for all sorts of important reasons Silbury is one place we should not trespass.
|
|||
Moth 5236 posts |
Sep 06, 2012, 19:11
|
||
|
Yes!! I'm sure this post'll be missed suddenly appearing in the middle, but we did indeed enter Skara Brae after 'closing time' (me, Jane, Hob & Mrs Hob) but we kept to the paths & wouldn't've dreamt of entering the houses, tempting as it was!!!! love Moth
|
|||
|
bladup 1986 posts |
Sep 06, 2012, 20:42
|
||
|
Moth wrote: Yes!! I'm sure this post'll be missed suddenly appearing in the middle, but we did indeed enter Skara Brae after 'closing time' (me, Jane, Hob & Mrs Hob) but we kept to the paths & wouldn't've dreamt of entering the houses, tempting as it was!!!! love Moth What stopped you going in the house's ? seeing as you would have not moved or damaged anything, and nobody would have even known! the place has sand all over the floor, so your feet wouldn't even really touch the real floor, to be honest going into there at 1 in the morning near midsummer [ before an annular eclispe ] in the strangest half light is one of my best memories and i wouldn't change that for the world, i know some people see this in itself as disrespectful but all i can say is i know we did it with the utmost respect for the ancesters [ but not the people who "run" the place ], i live in cornwall and carn euny and chysauster [ as you know ones free the other you pay ] are trampled on by 1000's of feet and seem ok, what does the odd pair of feet at skare brae really do and the custodians walk all over it sweeping the sand most days, with all the places you've been i don't think your the most casual visitors the place has had, i'm all for keeping the casual visitor out as they probably wouldn't have my respect for the place, so wink wink nudge nudge seems to work out alright because like we've said on this thread most people stick to the rules, have you ever been one for breaking the rules moth [ a no would surprise me ].
|
|||
|
Moth 5236 posts |
Sep 07, 2012, 06:41
|
||
|
Well, for me it wasn't to do with respect for the ancients - they're dead & don't care - it was more to do with not wanting to do ANY damage, no matter how invisible or infinitesimally small. If a person or people went traipsing around through the houses every night, or every other night, or once a week, or once a month, invisible infinitesimally small damage would become less invisible & less infinitesimal. I think our logic was as Rhiannon said - we were only doing exactly what we would have been doing if we'd entered during opening hours, so definitely wouldn't be doing ANY damage that we wouldn't've done if we'd gone in when it was open. love Moth
|
| Pages: 38 – [ Previous | 1 … 27 28 29 30 31 32 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
