=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Stonehenge Solstice: is there a risk?
Log In to post a reply
102 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Littlestone
Littlestone
5386 posts

Edited Jul 01, 2010, 15:21
Re: Stonehenge Solstice: is there a risk?
Jul 01, 2010, 07:59
Mustard wrote:
What exactly is the "risk"?

Personally, I have more interest in chewing my own balls off than attending a solstice gathering at Stonehenge, but if 20,000 people have a desire to celebrate at the stones, then I'm more than happy for them to do so.

I also think that mentioning 40-odd drug arrests is pointlessly inflammatory. What exactly does this have to do with anything? And 40 drug arrests in a crowd of 20,000 revellers is, frankly, insignificant. Especially considering that most of these arrests are likely to be for cannabis.

The article makes some good points and an interesting read, but it's clearly a prejudiced piece of writing.


I don't follow your reasoning Mustard; it's as equally irrelevant that you, personally, are happy for 20,000 people to celebrate at Stonehenge, as it is for Joe Bloggs to be happy for 1,000 people a day to travel 100 miles an hour on our motorways. Personal happiness doesn't come in to it - the law on these matters however does. The wish to do something (or allow it to be done) does not constitute a right for it to be done. The risks of 20,000 people crammed into a vey small area (Stonehenge) should be obvious, but if not you'll find some of those risks outlined in the third paragraph of the Heritage Action feature under discussion here.

Those risks, to which I now add my own as a conservator, are never right ever - ie, to do anything to an artifact that might possibly damage it. Again, it is completely irrelevant to argue (as it has been argued elsewhere) that the sarsen at Stonehenge is unlikely to suffer damage from one night's revelry. Not so, damage comes in various forms, but whatever its form it's accumulative. If that were not the case there would be no need to fence off Stonehenge at all would there? It's a contradiction in terms to say Stonehenge must be fenced off all year round but on one night of the year 20,000 or 30,000 or 50,000 people may climb all over it and somehow the laws of conservation on that night mysteriously do not apply. What nonsense.

That's the conservation argument, moving on to the social/sacred argument. Videos show the ground in and around Stonehenge this year strewn with litter. Is this really acceptable to you and are you really happy for people to do it? I doubt it, from the social, sacred or legal points of view I can't see anyone being happy with it (unless you're one of the 20,000 people engaged in the act and don't give a tinker's cuss what it might mean to others in the wider community).

But social and sacred arguments aside, the last time I checked the penalty for dropping litter in this country was £75. Unless English Heritage (and the National Trust) have some kind of special dispensation at Stonehenge they seem to me to be breaking the law by complicity - ie by preventing an offence taking place at a time and place under their control. Remember too that litter doesn't behave itself - it has a nasty habit of being dispersed all over the surrounding area. Are you still happy for 20,000 people to contributing to that kind of dispersion? Same applies to drug offences; the possession of cannabis is certainly not insignificant as you state. Possession of cannabis can carry an £80 spot fine, and a third offence for possession will render a person liable to arrest and prosecution with a custodial sentence of up to five years. Dealing in the drug carries a sentence up to 14 years. The Solstice celebrations at Stonehenge cannot be compared to a minor late night party at the end of your street. On the contrary, we have at Stonehenge 20,000 (plus) people, many of whom will have been drinking, and some 'smoking', making their way from the Stonehenge 'venue' within hours of sunrise. There's little or no public transport from the site at that time so, you tell me, are you still happy to have an armada of people, many of whom will be still under the influence of alcohol and drugs, on the roads and driving away from Stonehenge in the early hours after sunrise?

You wouldn't expect littering, ground invasion, alcohol and drug taking at the worst controlled football match so why it is allowed at Stonehenge is beyond me.
In reply to:
Re: Stonehenge Solstice: is there a risk? (Mustard)		 Replies:
Re: Stonehenge Solstice: is there a risk? (nigelswift)
Re: Stonehenge Solstice: is there a risk? (Mustard)
Re: Stonehenge Solstice: is there a risk? (nigelswift)
Re: Stonehenge Solstice: is there a risk? (Wiggy)
Topic Outline:
The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index