Radical plans emerge to buy up Culloden on “behalf of nation”

[figheadair]

A worthy cause and one that I will be supporting.

Radical plans emerge to buy up Culloden on “behalf of nation”

[Jock Scot]

I have very mixed feelings over this and of course efforts must be made to protect the past, but the problem is, we don’t live in Utopia. The comments section make interesting reading.

[Tobus]

I'm curious as to what makes these plans "radical"? Here in the US, it is pretty much expected that sites of historical importance are taken by government under Eminent Domain and preserved as parks. But, of course, we generally have plenty of room here. Is the area around Culloden getting pretty tight, in terms of room for development and growth?

I support the effort to preserve the battle sites there. As a Texan, I would caution Scots not to let happen at Culloden what happened here at the Alamo. The city ended up developing all around it to the point where it's now virtually impossible to recreate the expanded area where everything happened. It has just become one tiny run-down building surrounded by urban development, in part because it was never fully protected as a historic landmark (until recently it was privately owned by the Daughters of the Republic of Texas). Future generations deserve the chance to experience their history, and once the land is swallowed up by development, there's no getting it back. The time is now to protect it.

[Jock Scot]

Without the benefit of maps, or knowing who owns what and where and how far the important areas of the battlefield stretch it is difficult to comment accurately. However Tobus does raise pertinent points. As far as I am aware, the National Trust owns about a third of the area of the battlefield so that should be safe. I am not aware how much more of the important battlefield marker points are outwith the National Trust area, so again maps would be useful. As a local observer, building land is not in desperate shortage , so at least on the face of it, there are alternatives.

To be fair, the Scottish Government and their predecessors have/had to make similar difficult decisions in the past, such as putting the main A9 trunk road right through the battle lines at Killiecrankie and now they are putting a duel carriageway in, to double the disturbance and as another example, the putting of a huge Electricity pylon right in the middle of the site of "the battle of the Shirts", so there is form! However, there is no excuse for planners to sacrifice historic sites without careful thought. So yes, protection may be necessary, the problem is that in a country with limited resources, a sympathetic Governmental "ear" is often difficult to find.

We need to know the facts.

[figheadair]

Without the benefit of maps, or knowing who owns what and where and how far the important areas of the battlefield stretch it is difficult to comment accurately. However Tobus does raise pertinent points. As far as I am aware, the National Trust owns about a third of the area of the battlefield so that should be safe. I am not aware how much more of the important battlefield marker points are outwith the National Trust area, so again maps would be useful. As a local observer, building land is not in desperate shortage , so at least on the face of it, there are alternatives.

We need to know the facts.

For an understanding of the ground I can thoroughly recommend Culloden: The History and Archaeology of the Last Clan Battle by Tony Pollard

[lschwartz]

Without the benefit of maps, or knowing who owns what and where and how far the important areas of the battlefield stretch it is difficult to comment accurately...

Jock, here is a link to the Google maps satellite view of the battlefield: https://www.google.com/maps/search/b.../data=!3m1!1e3

Larry

[Jock Scot]

Jock, here is a link to the Google maps satellite view of the battlefield: https://www.google.com/maps/search/b.../data=!3m1!1e3

Larry

Thank you for that. Actually Google maps are not helpful for finding land boundaries, who owns what, where the pertinent battlefield markers are, proposed planning applications, where does the land in question stand in the minds of officialdom(if it does) for future planning applications, etc..

Actually, I know the battlefield area pretty well, what I don't know is who owns what and where. Where the National Trust bounderies are etc.. What and where outwith the NT area is going to be protected in future and at what cost. Is a compulsory purchase order a possibility? How much is the public expected to contribute? Is this good use for public funds when there ARE other pressing issues needing the finance? Personally I would need to know all of the above before I part with a penny.

Sorry, but its the farmer in me at work here.

[figheadair]

I would caution Scots not to let happen at Culloden what happened here at the Alamo. The city ended up developing all around it to the point where it's now virtually impossible to recreate the expanded area where everything happened. It has just become one tiny run-down building surrounded by urban development, in part because it was never fully protected as a historic landmark (until recently it was privately owned by the Daughters of the Republic of Texas). Future generations deserve the chance to experience their history, and once the land is swallowed up by development, there's no getting it back. The time is now to protect it.

Just look at Bannockburn .

[Father Bill]

Just look at Bannockburn .

These are the best I could come up with, Peter. Your comments please?

https://www.facebook.com/NTSBannockburn

https://photos.com/featured/battle-o...n-archive.html

[Karl R]

These are the best I could come up with, Peter. Your comments please?

I think you'll get a better feel by looking at satellite view on Google Maps. You can see that the entire area between the Bannonck Burn and Stirling Castle has been turned into a series of subdivisions.

A portion of the battlefield is free of development, so it's slightly better preserved than The Alamo, where only a few of the buildings remain, overshadowed by surrounding hotels (though the Menger Hotel is a historic building in its own right ... by American standards, not European standards).