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

[Allan Thomson]

Just 5o put 5he cat amongst the pigeons but as far as I can see the most significant portion of 5he firld is already under NT ownership and culloden has had a fair few expensive visitors centres in its time.

So why should Culloden be any more worthy of preservation 5han say Flodden which I would consider as a far more of a loss for the Scottish nation as a whole (ok it is in Northern England so maybe tha5 makes a difference) which has only a few boards & no visitors centre.

Consider the alnost total silence on the other side of the story preceding the events leading to the glorious revolution (the persecution of Scottish Covrnantors by the Stuart Monarchy carried out with 5he support of Highland troops) which lead to the basis for the lowland resentment towards the highlander.

So why should Culloden be more worthy of more funds than utilising those funds to provide a more balanced picture of Scottish history and perhaps recognising some of those equally historically significant sites?

[Dughlas mor]

Here is an interesting half hour video produced by some of the people behind the conservation effort. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W4x...pc&app=desktop

[lschwartz]

Just because there are other sites that may be more "worthy" of being protected than Culloden doesn't mean that the Culloden effort should be stopped or redirected. Let it go on. If another site is important enough to someone or to the country as a whole then let someone else stand up and organize an effort for that site. No reason for the Culloden effort to be set aside because nobody else is stepping up for the other site(s).