Stonehenge pagan ordered to end 10-month protest

[BAJR Host]

I hate to do this... but know you love it really!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/28...an-protest

A pagan protester named Arthur Pendragon who believes he is an incarnation of King Arthur was yesterday ordered to halt a 10-month sit-in close to Stonehenge.

Pendragon - John Rothwell before he changed his name by deed poll 30 years ago - set up camp at the edge of the site last summer to protest against the restricted access to the stone circle.

He believes visitors should be allowed to walk close to the stones and touch them rather than being confined to a visitor centre and a pathway well away from the monument............



Now personally I think this does bear discussion...

What si he doing that needs eviction? Attacking tourists?
Is it not true the centre is terrible?
Whats wrong with getting near the stones.. after all... name another cirsle you can't get near?

If you can walk through pompey why not stonehenge?

etc...

So... batten down the pagan hatches... and discuss



"Entrepreneurs are simply those who understand that there is little difference between obstacle and opportunity and are able to turn both to their advantage."
Niccolo Machiavelli

[Oxbeast]

OK, I'll rise to the bait...

It is partly a question of numbers, there area bout a million people a year that visit Stonehenge. 800K pay to go through the turnstiles, and 200,000 look throuugh the fence from the road. I got these numbers from this article, which is pretty good in terms of balance and discussing the future of the monument
http://www.savestonehenge.org.uk/million.html

If a million people a year want to go in amongst the stones, it will be fairly knackered quite quickly. Unless you pave the whole site.

I for one would love to see more contextualisation of the monument into its landscape, but then I could be expected to say that, being a landscape archaeologist. I think that more people would be interested in following the cursus, investigating the realtionships between barrow groups and following the avenue to the sanctuary, as well as exploring the wider WHS landscape, and monuments like Woodhenge and Durrington.

Yes, the centre is terrible and needs replacing, but I don't think that the answer is to have no centre and open access to the stones.

[Paul Belford]

I think Arthur Pendragon is completely wrong about Stonehenge. But I also think that he is entitled to make his point peacefully in a public space - and indeed allowed access to the due process of the law to appeal against his eviction from that space.

("I disagree with what you say...etc. etc.", as Voltaire didn't actually say but is widely quoted as having done so.)

[Oxbeast]

Absolutely, Paul, I feel that evicting him is a mistake. Play the ball, not the man, as Voltaire (probably) said.

[kevin wooldridge]

Whilst the newspapers have given airing to the purpose of Pendragon's protest, which might suggest his 'eviction is somehow connected to the monument, it should be noted that Wiltshire CC actually used the invidious anti-traveller legislation to 'claim-back' their lay-by and not any legal provisions which might in any way be associated with heritage.

Irrespective of the merits of Pendragon and Stonehenge, this is shoddy law often used as a basis for discrimination against Roma and traveller communities. Its law well past its sell-by date and should be repealed. In that sense Pendragon is a victim, as are many other folk in today's supposedly 'caring' Britain.



With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...

[Digitaldigging]

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn?t speak up because I wasn?t a Communist;

And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn?t speak up because I wasn?t a trade unionist;

And then they came for the Jews, And I didn?t speak up because I wasn?t a Jew;

And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.

[Digitaldigging]

A tad alarmist perhaps. As someone with a reputation for Druid-baiting, I'll have to go along with the disagreeable 'an enemy of my enemy' adage and come to Arthur's defence. As far as the visitor centre goes, he's pretty much taking the stance that many professional heritage workers should feel a great deal of sympathy with.
He could also continue his protest on a daily basis quite legally if he slept elsewhere. I feel this isn't the end. It's not even the begining of the end, but the beginning of the end of the beginning of the end of the beginning. This could be a runner. . .

[matthew.law]

An interesting point that Kevin raises. Actually I thought the article suffered somewhat from lazy journalism as Mr Pendragon's story was repeated without any attempt to air Wiltshire CC's reasoning. Having said that, I fear it probably is as Mr Pendragon says, and I find that quite alarming as (OT?) I believe we should all be allowed to protest peacefully (and especially - wildly OT now - outside Parliament and Downing Street).

Stonehenge as it stands now is, in my opinion, a massively underwhelming visitor experience. Personally, I would love it if we could all walk up to the stones, but I do think Oxbeast is absolutely right about the numbers. I'd would love to see the centre improved though.

I found a photo on flickr from 1973. I'm not sure how it contributes to the debate, but I liked it
http://www.flickr.com/photos/glendaglita...otostream/

Matt

[Digitaldigging]

Nice image - I too am an old enough beast to remember walking in amongst the stones. The actual image escapes me, but there's one of a WW2 troop carrier churning around in the mud there too. So much for leaving only footsteps. . .
If you wanted to let people in again you wouldn't have to do anything too drastic - pontoons would be adequate - Tesco do it all the time. . .

[trowelhead]

I reckon he should try getting a job even if its just as a living memory rather than lounging around and sponging of the state. Just my opinion.

What do you mean lost on price again!