Surely someone has given permission ?

Should we just pray for serious rain?

VBB

Any word on this? I hope you had success today.

I must confess, no doubt due to my advanced age and equally ancient TV receiver, that I really don't know who the fuck Trinny and Susannah are!

Quick headlines for you, before my proper write-up:

There was no archaeological supervision (The site manager is not an archaeologist). The programme makers stuck sticks onto the ground on the figure so that the participants would know where to lie.

These were only removed when a local Pagan (me) told the CEO of Sussex Archaeological Society, who told the site manager to tell the programme makers to remove them. One of the researchers admitted this was a mistake. But nothing would have been done if I had not spotted the sticks in a photographic close-up. By definition, the sticks caused damage to archaeology, as they disturbed soil that was previously undisturbed.

Sussex Archaeological Society, the owners of the site, have failed in their cutodianship utterly, for the fiirst time, having previously been utterly worthy of out trust. As of this moment, effectively, local Pagans are the custodians of the Long Man, as it is they who have the best interests of the site at heart.

This cannot continue to be the case, obviously.

On the upside I was very proud to identify myself as a Site Inspector for Heritage Action.

Sorry I don't know how to link this, it is on the BBC news site, you can find the link on cba britarch rolling news

http://news.bbc.co.uk

VBB

More pictures now up from today:

http://s88.photobucket.com/albums/k165/cursuswalker/Trinny%20and%20Susannah%20at%20the%20Long%20Man/

It looks really crap anyway! What a waste of time

The Long Man of Wilmington's elbow has slipped. Trinny, Suzannah & their fellow tippy toe telly totties have caused some soil erosion. Heritage site experts are going to investigate tmrw (wed.)

I don't know much about computers, but wouldn't it have been quicker, cheaper, easier, and less controversial, to do the alterations using "Paint" or something?

New Eastbourne Herald story: http://www.eastbourneherald.co.uk/news?articleid=2997439

My full write-up is here:

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/60466/fieldnotes/long_man_of_wilmington.html

Heritage Action, please feel free to pilfer it as you see fit.

One of the participants defends herself:

http://www.sussexexpress.co.uk/news?articleid=3004102

The silence is broken!

Oh....I nearly forgot.

It seems that some men had to be drafted in to make up the numbers. Drop outs from the day before possibly?

National coverage in the Independent:

http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article2737140.ece

Sorry to go on:

We still need more responses in the local rag top make sure it stays front page. This paper is widely read by exactly the people we need on side:

http://www.sussexexpress.co.uk/news?articleid=2997769

http://www.sussexexpress.co.uk/viewarticle.aspx?sectionid=509&articleid=3004102

Just posted to the Sussex Express board:

I have now joined the Sussex Archaeological Society and I would urge other pagans to do so as well. If we are to be the ones who have the real best interests of this site at heart then it would be better for this to be from a position of empowerment, rather than having to protest every time such a misguided decision is taken. SAS have previously been excellent custodians of this site and they can expect there to be a motion tabled at their next AGM concerning this, unless they state, on the record, that from now on there will be NO authorised access to the Long man site except for the purposes of maintenance. Without such a clear statement the damage that could be done to the Long Man by people copying ITV's example will be even worse. It is high time ITV and the SAS issued a full apology for what happened.

Contact page for ITV:

http://www.itv.com/page.asp?partid=5

The franchise responsible is London Weekend Television
The programme is called "Trinny ans Susannah undress"

Incidentally, I have just found the original web-advert for participants in the show:

http://www.itv.com/page.asp?partid=6605

Better take a copy of that before they take it down!

Please will someone from Heritage Action e-mail me their number this evening!

I need to talk urgently but I'm, not putting my number up on here.

I am out but my wife is in and will give you my number when she picks up the e-mail.

Alternatively, is it okay for me to talk to the Daily Mail as a representative of Heritage Action? Yes or no?

I am able to report that one of our protestors has received a personal apology from one of the women involved.

She said she did not realise how much the Long Man meant to many people and also confirmed that they were told it was just concrete blocks and nothing more. They were also told not to take the leaflets being given out by protestors.

On the downside, and it is only right to report this, she told me about the appalling, and quite unacceptable, verbal abuse they received from a group totally unassociated with us. I have no reason to disbelieve her. This group have not created any of the media attention this issue has needed and I do not wish to be associated with them.

This apology should be accepted in the spirit intended, in my view, as it is a sign that our message has got across. I hope more of the participants will follow suit.

The Sussex Archaeological Society are also realising that giving permission for this event was a bad idea and have asked to meet with a local druid who is also a Heritage Action site inspector and a member of LAW. Hopefully this meeting will be productive.

What remains is for ITV to be shamed into not daring to use the footage they obtained, which can only encourage further abuse of the Long Man of Wilmington.

The woman concerned expressed disappointment at the idea that the footage would go unused, until it was pointed out to her that what happened on the Long Man may result, in the long run, in closer cooperation between the owners of the site and those who care for the Long Man.

From Damh the Bard:

"A video filmed at the Long Man protest can now be found on YouTube here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=aRygEvMfuCU

To embed this video in your own website just copy and paste this HMTL code onto your page:

It ain't pretty, but it tells a story.

Peace
Damh"

Big deal, it's not like they're driving D9 Cats is it?
Get a grip!

I would be grateful if anyone with a legally oriented mind could pass me their comments on the following sections of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological
Areas Act 1979, as well as any other comments on the Act. I am particularly interested as to whether placing sticks in the ground could be considered “works” under the terms of the Act.

http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/ancient_monuments_and_archaeological_areas_act_1979.pdf

Ancient Monuments and Archaeological areas act 1979

Section 13 Paras 3, 5, 7

Section 17 Paras 3, 4 (a)(d)(e), 5

Section 21 Para 10

Section 28 Paras 1, 2,

Section 29

Section 33 Para 1

Section 37 Paras 5, 6

Section 58

Section 61 (In particular the definition of “works”)

One of the participants justifies herself:

"Right I no u guys have these opinions and believe what was done to be wrong & i'm not gona disrespect your oppinions but I was one of the women who took part and I was disgusted in which the way the pagans went about putting their point across. They talked about us disrespecting the land that gods provided etc but they totally disrespected us as human being by calling us prostitutes and hoes! I feel that they are being slightly hipacritical in the fact that we as human beings are also gods work and should have respect for one another. The way in which they treated me and others, there is no way I would have listened to their views but had they gone about it in other ways I may have had the time of day for them. I feel that they acted for the camras and media and there was no need to treat the women like that! I do understand what they are saying, but I also feel that if what was done has helped women to acept their bodies and has made a difference to women who feel unhappy with themselves then it was well worth the abusive language and 'baaa'ing from the pagan and the hard climb up the hill."

The two who insulted the women were NOT with the main group of protestors.

She made the comment here:
http://www.eastbourneherald.co.uk/news?articleid=2993284&CommentPage=5&CommentPageLength=10#comments

Final count on Long Man: 97 women and one man.
(source: You Tube video)

From the Anderida Message Board:

Hi everyone.

Just had a meeting with the Sussex Archaeological Society.

I'm very pleased to say that we are now all pointing in the same direction and that our issues are no longer with the Sussex Archaeological Society

There will be releasing a full statement and press release in the near future.

Regards.
Greg Draven.

STATEMENT FROM THE SUSSEX ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY:

The Sussex Archaeological Society would like to apologise to representatives of the Pagan Community, or any other individual or groups, who might have been offended by recent television filming on the Long Man of Wilmington. It was not the Society’s intention to cause offence. The Society is proud of its curation of the Long Man. In future the Society will consult representatives of the Pagan Community and other interested parties before sanctioning any significant activities.

John Manley, CEO, Sussex Archaeological Society
July 16th 2007.

Before I leave off cyber-bothering for this evening, can I just say that, in my view, Sussex Archaeological Society are no longer the problem.

In fact I'm willing to praise them for their willingness to learn from all this and move on. I am now a member and proud to be a part of the organisation who own the Long Man.

If anyone felt able to thank Sussex Archaeological Society for their apology it might be a good thing.

You can do this here (See bottom of page):
http://www.sussexexpress.co.uk/news?articleid=3038817