Whitby Abbey
17/09/2009 in Access to sites
Links
- ARCH
- Artefact Erosion Counter
- avebury-web.co.uk
- Cornish Sites Protection
- Cornwall Archaeology Society
- Council for British Archaeology
- English Heritage
- Ethical Metal Detecting Association
- Heritage Snippets
- heritagetalks.org
- ICOMOS-UK
- Journey to the Past
- Megalithomania
- Orkneyjar
- Rescue
- Tackling Heritage Crime
- The Art of Jane Tomlinson
- The Barford Blog
- The Modern Antiquarian
- The National Trust
- Wiltshire Heritage Museum
Recent Posts
- Stonehenge: please vote how the National Trust would have wished in 1927.
- Stonehenge: a word to the National Trust voters from Friends of the Earth
- “A ban on drag hunting by National Trust would ‘destroy’ its relations with countryside, warn MPs”
- Heritage theft: why can’t we ID these people?
- Archaeologists deliver “low blow” to detectorists!
Archives
Pages
Follow Us
Twitter Feed
- Our biggest fans this week: @JohnAdamsEbble, @sufiboy, @drsimonwoodward. Thank you! via sumall.com/thankyou?utm_s… https://t.co/7uyV9a1qho 20 hours ago
- Our biggest fans this week: @JohnAdamsEbble, @sufiboy, @drsimonwoodward. Thank you! via sumall.com/thankyou?utm_s… https://t.co/xuloU51Kvs 20 hours ago
- Stonehenge: please vote how the National Trust would have wished in 1927. heritageaction.wordpress.com/2017/10/21/sto… 21 hours ago
- Stonehenge: a word to the National Trust voters from Friends of the Earth dlvr.it/PwT06F 2 days ago
- Stonehenge: a word to the National Trust voters from Friends of the Earth heritageaction.wordpress.com/2017/10/19/sto… 2 days ago
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
11/10/2009 at 10:52
Willow
Surely the author does not disagree with an entrance fee imposed of a mere £5.50 for adults and £2.80 for kids. I would have thought it a small price to pay knowing that the funds will no doubt go to the preservation of the abbey and other buildings around the country, unless of course the author has proof undeniable to the contrary.
05/11/2010 at 12:32
Vee
I don’t think this is exactly fair – there are other things at the top of the 199 steps (you can see one in the photo – well worth visiting the church! And the views are wonderful of the coast) – it is not exclusive access to the Abbey – if it was, then it would be more of a justifiable argument.
It is also worth considering the impact a sign for the abbey at the bottom of the steps would have on the built environment of the street – knowing the sites in question I can see it being quite obtrusive. It is also fairly predictable that EH charge admission to higher profile sites – I know not all have an entry charge, but big ones do tend to.
Speaking from experience (of a variety of heritage sites!), there are always people who will be unhappy or who argue that they weren’t told, or the signs aren’t clear enough, no matter what! Sometimes it would be nice for people to take the responsibility on themselves.
I don’t agree with certain things the EH do (Kenilworth Castle, anyone?) and Simon Thurley is usually pretty accurately portrayed in various TV programmes, but I do think it is important they exist.
And as for the Stonehenge visitor centre, I think there are big issues there due to ownership of land and the land around the monument is rich in archaeology – difficult to choose what to destroy? It’s not a decision I would like to be faced with, certainly.
17/03/2012 at 13:42
heritageaction
We agree, not at all fair.