home / the heritage journal

Welcome to the
Heritage Journal

news and views from Heritage Action

If you would like to contribute something, please email us.

A guest article submitted by Moss.

While we welcome reports on heritage-related subjects to the Heritage Action Journal, the opinions expressed therein and the accuracy of the reporting lie solely with the originators of the report.

Here is an open letter we are sending to The London 2012 Organising Committee:

Dear Committee Members,

The London Stone - an open letter to the organising committee

The London Stone is today a little-regarded limestone boulder, a blackened and damaged fragment of the original, set behind an iron grille low in the wall of a building awaiting redevelopment at 111 Cannon Street. Yet, dating back a thousand years or perhaps two thousand or even far longer, it has some claim to being considered a geographical, historical and ceremonial heart of London and was for centuries the traditional place to conduct various ceremonies including the swearing of oaths.

For these reasons we should like to propose that it should be temporarily placed in the Olympic Stadium as a potent symbol of London upon which the Olympic oath could be sworn.

The London Stone. Photo credit: Alan S

The origins of the stone are lost in antiquity. Some authorities suggest it was part of a prehistoric stone circle that stood on the site of St Paul's, others that it may be the altar piece from a temple built by Brutus of Troy around 1075 BC. A more commonly offered speculation is that it is of Roman origin, a theory supported by the existence of known Roman buildings in its vicinity. A persistent speculation is that the stone may have been a Milliarium Aureum or Golden Milestone, a symbolic centre point of the city from which every distance in Roman Britain was measured. This belief was already in circulation in the 16th Century (although Sir Christopher Wren suggested that it was too big to be of Roman origin).

Whatever its origins, there is no doubt it has occupied an important place in the history of London for very many centuries. The first written reference to it is in an early 10th century gospel book where some lands are described as being 'near unto London stone' and by 1198 it appeared on maps as Lonenstane or Londenstane. In the twelfth century the city of London's first mayor lived close to it and was named Henry Fitz-Ailwin de Londonestone.

In 1450 further "mayoral" connections with the stone were established when it was the scene of "Jack Cade's Rebellion" (later recounted by Shakespeare in Henry VI, part II) in which Cade struck it with his sword and declared himself "Lord of London". Over the years the stone became a ceremonial centre for a number of civil and legal purposes with various sources citing it as being used for the making of proclamations, passing laws, reclaiming debts and swearing oaths. Petitions were struck against the stone to formally register them with the authorities.

Although moved several times within Cannon Street and now being only a small part of the original, it was originally an impressive feature, standing in the centre of the roadway. It was described as "very tall" by John Stow in 1598 and "a great stone called London Stone, fixed in the ground very deep, fastened with bars of iron, and otherwise so stronglie set that if cartes do runne against it through negligence, the wheeles be broken, and the stone itself unshaken. The cause why this stone was there set, the verie time when or other memorie thereof, there is none". Although reduced to a much smaller piece the Stone has somehow survived, not least because of the sense of it's importance, albeit undefined or mystical, demonstrated by previous generations, perhaps to the shame of this one.

Indeed, its very survival is a potent symbol of London itself, both of them having endured despite civil strife, plague, fire and even the blitz - during which the stone remained unscathed despite the bombing of St Swithin's church to which it had long been attached. The church, which was at the current site of the stone was subsequently demolished and only the stone survives from that time. Soon, the new building to which it is attached is to be demolished and it is planned to re-house the stone once again in the planned replacement building. The London Stone, like London, is a survivor.

The easily missed roadside location of The London Stone. Photo credit: Alan S

We hope that our proposal might meet with your approval. We feel that the intended temporary removal of the stone to the Museum of London in 2010 during the redevelopment works provides a very felicitous opportunity for it to be used during the Olympic ceremonies in 2012, and one that we hope will not be missed. Auspicious, ceremonial and mystical stones are of course deep in the British psyche and represent an aspect of Britishness that is recognised worldwide. We feel that the London Stone has an unrivalled claim to be a chosen symbol of the long and enduring nature of London and it's history before the eyes of the world.

As we approach the fifth anniversary of Heritage Action's first registration we have just had a stunning reminder of exactly why we care so passionately about our prehistoric sites and try so hard to highlight threats to them and their settings. This image of the incomparable Castlerigg Stone Circle by Paul Atlas-Saunders is a wonderful example of the extraordinary visual impact of many of these places, while Alex Langstone's poem which accompanies it illustrates just some of the reasons why they are appreciated by such large numbers of people.

Castlerigg stone circle. Image credit Paul Atlas-Saunders

Written Within View of Castlerigg Stone Circle
by Alex Langstone

I cannot believe
That in this fateful hour
The infinite beauty
That shall caress mine eyes
Behold!
I cannot believe, that the
Glorious fanfare of strange
Stark contrasts that my gaze
Is upon, so lifts me that
I become overwhelmed by passions
That I have never known.
I cannot believe that
The form of beauty
That the scene foretells
Can (alone) create such an impression
Upon my mind
That primeval memories stir
From depths uncharted territory.
So I am fired up by the glory of
The Holy Spirit
In Her pantheistic ways
Upon these eternal hills of mine.
I cannot believe that
Such variety of colour
And texture can engulf the
Ageless pattern strewn formations
Of fell side and mystic ring
And I cannot believe that Deity
Has not a hand in all of this and more
For surely all life's creation
Emanates from She who is
Sacred Earth's
Goddess Divine.

You can visit Alex's admirable blog here and also find hundreds of megalithic poems and images on our own Littlestone's blog here

After nine long years the ambience and surroundings of the incomparable Stanton Moor Stone Circle are now safe.

It is only fair to record that this may well not have come about through the workings of the statutory protection system alone (including the efforts of the adequately paid statutory guardians of the site and the handsomely rewarded legal profession). It is a victory that has very much been down to an extra factor - the astonishing persistence over the years against all odds and in all weathers of large numbers of protestors (working with very many local people and the National Parks Authority) many of whom have been widely dismissed as "scruffy long-haired layabouts". It is also right to remember the three people who sadly lost their lives at the site during this time.

Anyone who has visited the site in the past few years could not fail to have been struck by two things: first, the magical nature of the stone circle and it's surroundings - surely one of the most precious cultural and aesthetic assets in the whole of Europe; and second the amazing living conditions of the protestors (prompted by the threat of eviction by bailiffs) - precipitous tree houses at terrifying heights, a network of connecting rope walkways extending for two kilometres and a maze of tunnels and emergency bunkers.

It is now possible that this extraordinary place will now remain unsullied for another thousand years. If so, posterity will have cause to be grateful to ordinary people, some of whom have been labelled as "hippies who should go out and get a real job". Without them, people in suits with real jobs - those promoting the quarrying ambitions of Stancliffe Stone - might well have secured a different outcome.

Ian Pearson, estates manager of Stancliffe Stone, recently said "We've been working closely with the national park authority, local community and other interested parties to reach an agreement... We would like to thank all of the stakeholders involved in finalising this agreement, which will help protect the Nine Ladies Stone Circle, wildlife and surrounding landscape." However, we trust posterity will appreciate that the struggle was to prevent quarrying not about "working together" and who precisely it was that wanted, for nine long years, to do the quarrying. It certainly wasn't "hippies"!

Read more about this victory here and here. See also our original Alert which thankfully (and rather unusually) is no longer needed!

The settings of our ancient monuments are integral to their understanding and appreciation and vital parts of our common inheritance. Although they have no agreed definition or specific statutory protection their value has long been universally acknowledged so that, for instance, building a gas works close to a monument would be seen as unacceptable. Similarly, the existence of a run down visitor centre near to one is deemed "a national disgrace" (as was said in parliament about Stonehenge).

The importance of settings is laid out in a host of national and international documents such as the Burra Charter and UNESCO recommendations and conventions like The Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding of Beauty and Character of Landscapes and Sites (1962), The Recommendation concerning the Preservation of Cultural Property Endangered by Public or Private Works (1968 ), The Recommendation concerning the Safeguarding and Contemporary Role of Historic Areas (1976), The Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003), and more specifically The World Heritage Convention (1972) and its Operational Guidelines, where "setting" is listed as an attribute of authenticity and as needing protection through the establishment of buffer zones.

This was recently laid out even more plainly by the General Assembly of ICOMOS, the International Council on Monuments and Sites in its Xi'an Declaration (2005) - "Legislation, regulation and guidelines for the protection, conservation and management of heritage structures, sites and areas should provide for the establishment of a protection or buffer zone around them that reflects and conserves the significance and distinctive character of their setting."

It is against this background that some recent British attitudes cause, or should cause, considerable disquiet for all who value our heritage.

In particular there is this from the May 2008 minutes of the English Heritage Advisory Committee: "The Committee also discussed the problems surrounding buffer zones and settings and agreed that solutions were dependent upon local authorities giving them sufficient consideration. The Committee was informed that a cross Group EH Project Board was looking at the issue of settings. The Board felt that if the policy for the core area was strong enough, there would be no need for a buffer zone."

We disagree. And we wonder how English Heritage can square this with international opinion and Conventions?

Further, we wonder who benefits from such a policy? Not the Heritage-owning public, for certain. Clearly, the only beneficiaries are those who have a financial or selfish interest in exploiting or destroying settings. Tarmac plc has spent many years progressively removing vast tracts of the surroundings of the Thornborough monuments under the very simple banner "The Henges themselves are perfectly safe". At the same time, metal detectorists have held several mass rallies close to the henges, removing both artefacts and knowledge in the face of the powerless disapproval of the authorities. Of course, the henges ARE safe. But on that basis of justification the setting of the most important prehistoric monument between Stonehenge and the Orkneys is now more than half destroyed physically and more is in hand and planned. English Heritage's recent words cannot have been greeted with other than enormous satisfaction in the head offices of the likes of Tarmac and by the organisers of metal detecting rallies.

At he same time we note that a new Stonehenge Management Plan has been published and this contains a very significant change. No longer is it necessary for a new Visitor Centre to be located outside the World Heritage Area. Now it can be built within it (providing it doesn't cause damage). We have to wonder WHY this change was made - why is that which has long been regarded as unacceptable now deemed acceptable and indeed how it is now deemed possible to build something on Stonehenge's world-acknowledged setting without damaging it? UNESCO's Recommendation concerning the Preservation of Cultural Property Endangered by Public or Private Works (1968 ) seems to give all the warning that is required when it says "Due account should be taken of the relative significance of the cultural property concerned when determining measures required for the preservation of an entire site, structure, or other forms of immovable cultural property from the effects of private or public works". By any measure Stonehenge and it's entire site are of rather high "relative significance". Why then should a new Management Plan suddenly target it for new public works when the rest of Wiltshire is available? We know not.

Further, we are reminded of these comments about the recently published Power of Place document and the omission of adequate provision for the protection of archaeological landscapes - ".....there can be no doubt that in the future those who profit from the destruction of other, and specifically archaeological, assets will seize on these omissions for their own rapacious ends...." http://www.assemblage.group.shef.ac.uk/issue6/Cumberpatch_Power_web.html

Is there a pattern showing? It would seem so. We can only hope that in the final outcome the Stonehenge setting will NOT be damaged, that the omissions in Power of Place will be rectified and that when the EH Project Board finally reports upon the issue of settings it will not repeat its Advisory Committee's assertion that "if the policy for the core area was strong enough, there would be no need for a buffer zone."

We can only reiterate, the World Heritage Convention Operational Guidelines list "setting" as an attribute of authenticity and as needing protection through the establishment of buffer zones. This clearly implies that the setting should be protected in it's own right and cannot be considered protected merely by virtue of the "core area" being 100% safe. That's pure Tarmacese and is a license not to protect the setting but to ignore it. We recommend the EH Commissioners take a coach trip up to Thornborough to see what havoc has been wreaked on their watch.