Kirkstall Abbey

jim · Post by **jim** » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 12:48 pm

Surely if a complete "ancient" building is required it would be much more effective, cheaper, and less damage risking to the existing building remains to build a total reproduction on a (not TOO close) nearby site?Those who want to contemplate genuine history can have their way and those who prefer a theme park experience can have theirs.

Si · Post by Si » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 12:50 pm

My thoughts exactly, Jim and Drapesy.Jogon - thanks for the response. The 1715 drawing would be very interesting to compare to todays ruins, eg: pre-tower collapse.

Jogon · Post by **Jogon** » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 1:04 pm

Sijust let me blow the dust off my copy of Thoresby's Ducati EditDone see attd

Jogon · Post by **Jogon** » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 1:14 pm

click on paperclip rather than red cross for detailed image

The Parksider · Post by **The Parksider** » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 1:29 pm

drapesy wrote: History is as it is , not as you would like it to be. Hmmmm. Best pull down the Jorvik centre then?

The Parksider · Post by **The Parksider** » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 1:32 pm

jim wrote: those who prefer a theme park experience can have theirs. "I can see it now...instead of the lovely grounds there'll be Mc Donalds, Pizza Hut, Nero's, Tesco Express, a Car Park and anything else you can imagine"It was Caron who sugessted a sort of "theme park" may evolve.Anyway I can't shift most folk Jim, so can I scale down my request to a re-build of Scotland Mill as a working model?

Si · Post by Si » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 1:57 pm

"Hmmmm. Best pull down the Jorvik centre then?"Good point, Parksider.However, IMO the actual archaeological remains of the Viking settlement at the Vorvik Centre are not as "interesting" to the general public, being mainly wooden stumps and post holes (although of no lesser importance than the abbey.) These are preserved alongside or under the modern displays, with discovered artefacts displayed nearby.I think there is a significant difference between this type of historical reconstruction and a complete rebuild of Kirkstall Abbey.

LS1 · Post by **LS1** » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 2:16 pm

Si wrote: "Hmmmm. Best pull down the Jorvik centre then?"Good point, Parksider.However, IMO the actual archaeological remains of the Viking settlement at the Vorvik Centre are not as "interesting" to the general public, being mainly wooden stumps and post holes (although of no lesser importance than the abbey.) These are preserved alongside or under the modern displays, with discovered artefacts displayed nearby.I think there is a significant difference between this type of historical reconstruction and a complete rebuild of Kirkstall Abbey. I think that the Abbey House Museum is the best preserved being built around one of the original gatehouses and shows how it would have beenJorvic has very limited remains in comparison to KA, and is not a reconstruction on old ruins, rather a construction alongside (which I think the old toilet block at KA is also).So there are well preserved parts of the abbey and those that have been renovated.You could also argue that the A65 should again be re-routed through the knave as in times gone by the road into Leeds actually passed right through the centre of the abbey.

Si · Post by Si » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 2:17 pm

Jogon wrote: Sijust let me blow the dust off my copy of Thoresby's Ducati EditDone see attd Thanks Jogon.I've found this water colour by Thomas Girtin showing the abbey from the same angle. It must have been painted after 1779 (tower collapse.)

Si · Post by Si » Fri 08 Feb, 2013 2:23 pm

LS1 wrote: You could also argue that the A65 should again be re-routed through the knave as in times gone by the road into Leeds actually passed right through the centre of the abbey. I've heard that story before, Lee. I was never quite sure if it wasn't just a myth.