|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Stonehenge » Yobs allowed to climb on Stonehenge – yet again! |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
Resonox 604 posts |
Jun 24, 2011, 04:56
|
|
tjj wrote: nigelswift wrote: "Oh Nigel I'm not sure anyone here is saying 'it doesn't matter'? that's a bit unfair." Apologies for that, it was just my shorthand, I'm sure none of us here thinks that literally. I guess it's just that I think it shouldn't happen more strongly than most - not because of the particular merits of the case but because any lowering of the guard has wider general consequences on how stuff gets treated. I'm a zealot, see. It's a mean, killjoy job but someone has to do it! There is nothing wrong with being passionate about what you hold most dear; I mentioned the possibility of moving the all-night party somewhere else nearby and just having the sunrise celebration at Stonehenge - there were no comments on that suggestion so I'm guessing the party is not popular anywhere in the vicinity of Stonehenge. Nigel to quote you from another post: "BUT they're in thrall to people they think they have to negotiate with and not offend. And THEY think touchy feely stewards from their own community are the right thing. Well they ain't. It's my temple not theirs. Atheists Rule, OK. There's shitloads more of us so why won't EH give US what we want?" Sorry, I have to disagree, Atheists don't rule OK. The Universe does and all it contains including the sun rising over the *Heel Stone at the summer solstice. That seems to be a cause for joy to the people who gather to watch it - though for the general good maybe alcohol should be banned - as it is at football matches (me being a killjoy now, as lets face it most people like a drink at a gathering). Meanwhile surely those who feel strongly about it should be petitioning their MPs to make it a prosecutable offence for anyone to climb on our most famous National Monument or to deface it in any way. *Perhaps the most famous of all ancient astronomical alignments is the summer solstice alignment at Stonehenge, Wiltshire. On the longest day of the year, viewed from the centre of the monument, the sun can be seen rising over the outlying Heel Stone between the massive uprights that form the central ring. The earth-banked Avenue that leads away from Stonehenge is aligned in the same direction for several hundred yards." From Danny Sullivan's Ley Lines - he then makes reference to William Stukeley (as Tiompan did in an earlier post). Very telling phrase there..."viewed from the centre of the monument"...not from dancing and prancing atop it. I'll repeat what I said(hinted at?) earlier too...Can we be 100% sure that these stones were originally in these positions and not placed in accordance with Mr. Keiller's idea of where they would fit theories or be aesthetically suited to catch sunsets/rises? |
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jun 24, 2011, 08:49
|
|
Resonox wrote: tjj wrote: nigelswift wrote: "Oh Nigel I'm not sure anyone here is saying 'it doesn't matter'? that's a bit unfair." Apologies for that, it was just my shorthand, I'm sure none of us here thinks that literally. I guess it's just that I think it shouldn't happen more strongly than most - not because of the particular merits of the case but because any lowering of the guard has wider general consequences on how stuff gets treated. I'm a zealot, see. It's a mean, killjoy job but someone has to do it! There is nothing wrong with being passionate about what you hold most dear; I mentioned the possibility of moving the all-night party somewhere else nearby and just having the sunrise celebration at Stonehenge - there were no comments on that suggestion so I'm guessing the party is not popular anywhere in the vicinity of Stonehenge. Nigel to quote you from another post: "BUT they're in thrall to people they think they have to negotiate with and not offend. And THEY think touchy feely stewards from their own community are the right thing. Well they ain't. It's my temple not theirs. Atheists Rule, OK. There's shitloads more of us so why won't EH give US what we want?" Sorry, I have to disagree, Atheists don't rule OK. The Universe does and all it contains including the sun rising over the *Heel Stone at the summer solstice. That seems to be a cause for joy to the people who gather to watch it - though for the general good maybe alcohol should be banned - as it is at football matches (me being a killjoy now, as lets face it most people like a drink at a gathering). Meanwhile surely those who feel strongly about it should be petitioning their MPs to make it a prosecutable offence for anyone to climb on our most famous National Monument or to deface it in any way. *Perhaps the most famous of all ancient astronomical alignments is the summer solstice alignment at Stonehenge, Wiltshire. On the longest day of the year, viewed from the centre of the monument, the sun can be seen rising over the outlying Heel Stone between the massive uprights that form the central ring. The earth-banked Avenue that leads away from Stonehenge is aligned in the same direction for several hundred yards." From Danny Sullivan's Ley Lines - he then makes reference to William Stukeley (as Tiompan did in an earlier post). Very telling phrase there..."viewed from the centre of the monument"...not from dancing and prancing atop it. I'll repeat what I said(hinted at?) earlier too...Can we be 100% sure that these stones were originally in these positions and not placed in accordance with Mr. Keiller's idea of where they would fit theories or be aesthetically suited to catch sunsets/rises? I'm sure Keiller made mistakes VBB will know , but sun rises etc were nothing to do with it . One of the splendid points about Avebury ,considering the huge amount of potential three stone circles ,cove , four entrances an avenue etc , it's an archaeoastronomy (from at least the Thom paradigm perspective ) free zone and that is nothing to do with Keiller . |
|
Kozmik_Ken 829 posts |
Jun 25, 2011, 10:14
|
|
I think that the main problem with Managed Access over recent years is that it concentrates all of the attendees into the small bit of land on which the stones stand. There has been an element of 'yob culture' at the summer solstice gathering since the early 60's, but during the days of the free festival in the 70/80's, the main body of attendees were concentrated on the festival site and not at the stones. The old festival attracted 30,000+ during it's height, but only a fraction of those went to the stones for sunrise. Those who were there for a party tended to stay near the stage. Now, however many people turn up have no option but to go into the stones. It's not a situation that can be easily solved, as any provision for party goers will be seen as a step back to the festival, which EH will not allow. Respect for the site is of course the perfect solution but unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world. What would probably be most effective is that if anyone climbed up onto the stones, the whole crowd bayed at them to get down. Sending in police or heavy handed stewards will only inflame the situation. |
|
|
The Eternal 924 posts |
Jun 25, 2011, 23:45
|
|
Littlestone wrote: Follow the links to the photos and video. What a circus! Enough is enough! Littlestone, Yup, that'll always happen, as long as everyone is allowed into the inner sanctum. If Stonehenge can handle this circus once a year, then fine, but if not, then stop it. Simple. After all, some people are being paid a lot of money to do this. Wish I was one of 'em. What about you? Cheers, TE. |
|
|
blossom 180 posts |
Jun 26, 2011, 09:19
|
|
nigelswift wrote: And why haven.t they taken steps to reduce numbers? Because riff-raff promise another Beanfield if they do. Blackmail by complete shites. I wouldn't usually allow something like this to annoy me but after reading the above comment it kept comming back to me and I feel the need to. I'm in no way condoning partying at the stones, but as has been mentioned by other folk it used to be that there was a festival further away from the stones with folk going to the stones for sunrise. I know there will be so many opinions about this and it's all a bit too"political" to discuss here. But my objection to nigels comment is that most people who know anything about what happened in that beanfield in 1985 know that the behaviour of the police was an absolute disgrace. The full details are well reported elsewhere on the web. I can't see why anyone would "promise another beanfield" |
|
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 26, 2011, 09:30
|
|
My reference to complete shites relates not to those that were at the Beanfield but to those who suggest it will happen again as a means to persuade EH against taking action to reduce numbers and protect Stonehenge. Of couirse they exist. EH aren't idiots and they have a statutory duty to protect Stonehenge and they certainly think far too many people are involved. So why haven't they taken the necessary action for 12 years? Not incompetence or laziness. Because of the threats. Ask them. "I can't see why anyone would "promise another beanfield"" See above. We had someone making that very threat in our Comments section very recently. |
|
|
blossom 180 posts |
Jun 26, 2011, 09:53
|
|
nigelswift wrote: So why haven't they taken the necessary action for 12 years? Not incompetence or laziness. Because of the threats. Ask them. "I can't see why anyone would "promise another beanfield"" See above. We had someone making that very threat in our Comments section very recently. I am still not sure what that"threat" would be. Are they "threatening" to allow themselves and their children to be herded into a field and then to be savagely beaten by over a thousand out of control police? |
|
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 26, 2011, 10:01
|
|
blossom wrote: I am still not sure what that"threat" would be. Are they "threatening" to allow themselves and their children to be herded into a field and then to be savagely beaten by over a thousand out of control police? No. It is the threat that if EH do what is needed for Stonehenge's benefit, i.e. impose a ballot system so as to restrict the numbers inside the circle to an amount where they can exert proper control and the protection of the monument, a lot of people will ignore all that and try to push in anyway, with all the consequent potential for conflict with the police and stewards that implies. |
| Pages: 5 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
