english heritage – the first 21 years

Stokesay Castle inShropshire is the best-preserved 13th-century fortifiedmanor house in England.It was amongst the first properties to beacquired and repairedby the new EnglishHeritage.

I am delighted to introduce this issue ofConservation Bulletin celebrating EnglishHeritage’s first years. In doing so, I particularly want to acknowledge the achievements of my predecessors. LordMontagu of Beaulieu steered English Heritagethrough our first eight years, gave us ourname – so much more memorable and appropriate than our official title, the HistoricBuildings and Monuments Commission forEngland – and began, as we have continued,by making quality customer service a priorityat all our properties. Jocelyn Stevens made his own distinctive contribution, generatingheadlines for the historic environment, savingDarwin’s home and workplace at DownHouse, now a candidate World Heritage Site, restoring the Albert Memorial and doing more than anyone to persuade theGovernment that the condition of Stonehengewas a national disgrace.

Over the years, we have demonstrated our expertise and professionalism in manydifferent ways, not least in the range and quality of our publications. In this, we weregreatly strengthened by our merger in with the Royal Commission on the HistoricalMonuments of England, which by then alsoincluded the Survey of London, both bodieswith long traditions of scholarly publicationbehind them. We now have a catalogue thatboasts hundreds of titles, all them of a highstandard, aimed at everyone from generalreaders of all ages to the most technical, scientific and academic of audiences. We are making information available as widely as possible through the internet, and have developed a major new web resource for local policy-makers, Historic Environment:Local Management, www.helm.org.uk.

Looking back over the last years, I am

proudest of the way we have played our part in redefining heritage. In our very firstMembers’ newsletter, published in thesummer of , we said that we would be joining the national amenity societies inworking to protect ‘not just a few majormonuments, but the whole historic environment’, and encouraging people ‘toappreciate the full value of their surroundings… and enjoy their heritage in all its subtletyand diversity’ (West , ). These sentiments were reflected years later, when,with the rest of sector, we published Power ofPlace. This has recently been described as ‘aseminal moment in the recent development ofpublic policy for the historic environment …everyday experiences of streets, buildings,parks, gardens, places of worship, fields,

2 | Conservation bulletin | Issue : Summer

ENGLISH HERITAGE – THE FIRST 21 YEARS

English Heritage – The First 21 YearsIntroductionSir Neil Cossons Chairman

Protection of the historic environment, the promotion of enjoyment and the achievement of understanding.

Paul

Hig

hnam

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

factories, offices, transport, schools, shops andhomes registered as an engagement withheritage just as surely as a visit to a countryhouse or a trip to a museum’ (Cowell ,). As a direct result of the political momentum achieved by Power of Place, we are now working closely with Governmenton a comprehensive reform of the system for protecting and managing the historic environment.

I am proud too that in we persuadedthe Government to identify potential newWorld Heritage Sites in England, of whichhave since been inscribed by UNESCO, – Saltaire, the Derwent Valley and theLiverpool waterfront – representing England’sunique industrial and commercial heritage. InLiverpool, and in many other great industrialcities such as Newcastle, we have workedclosely with local authorities to put thehistoric environment at the heart of economicand social regeneration. At the same time, wehave been able to find £. million to helpEngland’s cathedrals, some of our greatestcultural achievements. We established theUK’s first register of historic parks andgardens, and since have been givinggrants to support their restoration and repair.We have taken buildings as diverse asBrodsworth Hall and Stokesay, Clun andWigmore castles into care. We have restoredthe fire-damaged ruin of Hill Hall in Essexand returned it to residential use. We arecurrently finding creative solutions that willsecure the future of Apethorpe Hall inNorthamptonshire, Chatterley Whitfieldcolliery in Staffordshire and Ditherington Flax

Mill in Shrewsbury, the world’s first iron-framed building. We have made Stonehenge a priority, and are currently awaiting theGovernment’s decision on the road tunnel,the essential next step in finding a long-termsolution for the site.

We may have a wealth of experiencebehind us, but we are now more fleet of foot than ever, rising to new challenges andseizing every opportunity to further the threeobjectives that were laid down for us byParliament in , and which are still ourwatchwords: the protection of the historicenvironment, the promotion of enjoymentand the advancement of knowledge.

Cowell, B . ‘Why heritage counts: researching thehistoric environment’, Cultural Trends (), No. (December), –West, J J . ‘The common touch’, English HeritageNews (Summer),

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: Introduction

Issue : Summer | Conservation bulletin | 3

In 2005 English Heritageacquired DitheringtonFlax Mill in Shrewsbury,the first iron-framedfireproof building in the world and an icon of the IndustrialRevolution, to secure itsrepair and sustainablereuse.

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

© Jo

hn Y

ates

The decision leading to the creation ofEnglish Heritage was taken by MichaelHeseltine, the then Secretary of State for theEnvironment (DoE), when he responded to aproposal by the late Maurice Mendoza, theDirector of the Ancient Monuments andHistoric Buildings Directorate (DAMHB)that much of the directorate’s work might bedone better if it were hived off to an agency.Maurice retired in and I was appointedin his place. A short consultation documentwas issued in November , to which wereceived more than replies, with manyasking for more information. We thereforeproduced a much fuller document –The WayForward – which was issued in . It reiterated the proposal for an agency thatwould manage and maintain some monuments – such as castles, abbeys, hillfortsand burial mounds – in the care of theSecretary of State; enliven the presentation of those monuments; make grants for thepreservation of historic buildings and ancientmonuments; co-ordinate rescue archaeology;and advise the Secretary of State on listinghistoric buildings and scheduling ancientmonuments. The Secretary of State wouldretain responsibility for the broadest aspects of policy, confirmation of decisions on listingand scheduling, the exercise of all planningfunctions and maintenance of the RoyalPalaces and Parks. It argued that the requiredprofessional expertise and a more commercialapproach could be better exercised by anagency outside direct Government control.An agency could also be expected to use itsmonuments more intensively for educationand public enjoyment. Reservations that hadbeen expressed were also recorded: that thoseimprovements could as readily be made by

reorganisation within the DoE; that a morecommercial approach would bring vulgarity to the monuments; and that there would beduplication of work between the DoE and theagency. The document concluded with thereassurance that the agency’s first prioritywould be preservation. The rationale for theproposed division of responsibilities was notgiven; nor can I recall that it emerged duringdebates on the Bill. Broadly, it seems to havebeen that if an action benefited an individualor organisation it should be given to theagency; if, however, it could be deemedharmful, particularly in relation to the property rights of an individual, it should rest with a minister directly accountable toParliament.

The proposals formed the bedrock of thelegislation that followed but before a billcould be prepared there had to be furtheradvocacy. It was essential to have the backingof the Secretary of State’s two independentstatutory advisors – the Ancient MonumentsBoard (AMB) and the Historic BuildingsCouncil (HBC). Some members of bothbodies were sceptical. A conference was heldat Leeds Castle in at which the influenceof Mrs, now Dame, Jennifer Jenkins, thechairman of the HBC, supported by the lateSir Arthur Drew, chairman of the AMB, wasdecisive. I doubt whether the creation ofEnglish Heritage would have taken placewhen it did without her lead.

It was also essential that a large majority ofstaff working within DAMHB should acceptan invitation to serve in the agency on a two-year secondment. After that they could eithercommit themselves to the agency or return tothe DoE. It was always likely that nearly allthe professional staff involved would wish to



The Creation and EarlyDays of English HeritageSome personal recollectionsPeter Rumble Chief Executive 1984–9

After a smooth birth, the infant English Heritage rapidly embarked on a decade of eventful and exhilarating change.

join the agency. They were dedicated to theconservation cause. For others there wereattractions about remaining in a large government department. Discussions with thestaff and the relevant trade unions produced arange of reactions, from constructive welcomethrough resigned acceptance to overt hostility.The cynical view was that the change was allabout reducing the number of civil servants.But overall the response was encouraging.

The National Heritage Bill was introducedin the House of Lords and Second Readingtook place on November . It waswelcomed by all parties. It gave the agencythree main duties – to promote conservation,to use monuments in its care for public enjoyment and to promote education. Theagency’s powers were limited to England. TheRoyal Commission on the Historical Monu-ments of England was not included, althoughthat was merged with English Heritage later,nor were the non-occupied Royal Palaces.The new body did, however, subsume theAMB and HBC. The passage of the bill wassmooth and Royal Assent given on May. And so the new agency, statutorilynamed the Historic Buildings and MonumentsCommission for England, was created.

The plan was that the agency shouldassume its full powers on April butwith immediate limited powers to enable asmooth transfer of responsibilities from DoE.A chairman and a nucleus of commissionersand staff were needed quickly. Lord Montaguof Beaulieu was appointed chairman. His longexperience in conservation matters as ownerof the Beaulieu estate and founder memberand chairman of the Historic HousesAssociation and his expertise in the presentation of monuments, public relations,advertising and commerce were to proveinvaluable. Initially, three commissioners wereappointed and in November , after publiccompetition, I was appointed chief executive.More commissioners joined us later. Asrequired by the Act, they were experts in arange of subjects but also brought a fresh eyeto accepted policies and practices outside theirspecial fields. In addition, five committeeswere set up to advise on various policy issues.Work continued on staffing and support functions. The five months from Novemberwere ones of intense activity but by April we were ready to assume our full duties.

The early weeks and months were ones inwhich relationships, both internal and external, were explored and developed. Wehad to establish who did what. Broadly, thechairman and commissioners decided policy,

the key allocation of resources and issues ofpublic sensitivity. We had, too, to establishthe relationship between the Commission andits two statutory advisory bodies on ancientmonuments and on historic buildings as wellas the other committees that the Commissioncreated. At times the distinction betweenwhat was advisory and what was executiveseemed to get somewhat foggy. Requests for detailed information and the time taken in preparing for, and attending, meetings put a considerable burden on staff. Happily,most of the tensions that cropped up werecreative ones.

Our early relationship with DoE was basedon a common interest in success. DoE hadneither the staff, time or inclination to getinvolved in the nitty-gritty of our work. Wesubmitted and discussed annual plans and bidsfor resources based on a balanced request forinformation, later to become more onerous.We met annually with the Scots, Welsh, and,later, with the Northern Irish to exchangeideas on policy issues. We also liaised withother quangos to establish guidelines whereour responsibilities overlapped.

The conservation bodies had supported ourcreation but probably wished us to showmore aggression publicly on some issues,while commercial organisations pressed on usthe need for greater flexibility in consideringthe need for changes of use in a dynamic society – and, of course, greater speed intaking decisions.

Our relationship with the National Trustwas more complex. They welcomed us asfellow conservation workers but seemedcautious about our impact on their activities.They appeared to be concerned about ourintention to become more commercial andcreate a strong membership support base,possibly fearing an effect on their ownincome. In the event, competition seemed togenerate public interest to our mutual benefit.Their second concern seemed to be that wemight devote a greater share of resources toour own properties to the detriment of ourgrant-giving duties or that a larger share ofthose grants might go to towns schemes andvernacular buildings than to the great houses.The latter point was one shared by theHistoric Houses Association.

The numbers of staff coming on secondment meant that work could continuewithout much of a hiccup. The chairman’simpact on us was immediate. We dropped ourstatutory name and rechristened ourselvesEnglish Heritage. We chose a distinctive andmemorable logo. The way we presented our

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: The creation and early days of EH


monuments was likewise dramatically affected.There was a need to improve the presentationof nearly all monuments, with Stonehenge atthe top of the list. Within a month we set upa study group with the National Trust andlocal authority representatives and produced afirst-rate report, including a recommendationto close the A. Frustration after frustrationfollowed and years later the saga is stillcontinuing. Other initiatives were far moresuccessful. Colour souvenir guides wereproduced. The uniform of custodians waschanged to give a less institutionalised appearance. Events were arranged, playsperformed and the public welcomed. The useof monuments for educational purposes wasgreatly expanded. Our direct labour force andconservation teams continued to show theirexpertise and commitment and we weredelighted on April to take on the careof Osborne House and three historic housemuseums – Kenwood, Rangers House andMarble Hill House – on dissolution of theGreater London Council (GLC).

Policy on our public conservation dutiesneeded a far less radical change than that for monuments in care. On the ancientmonuments side, however, the scheduling of monuments had lagged lamentably behindthe initiative to list historic buildings. Only, monuments had been scheduled out of an estimated , sites that needed to be considered for protection. We thereforeinstituted a Monuments ProtectionProgramme. The work was complicated andprogress much slower than hoped for but atleast a start was made. On the historic buildings side we reviewed the grant rules and conditions inherited from DoE. Grantapplications far exceeded the resources available and our efforts to balance thembetween individual owners, includingchurches, and the other schemes that weoperated in partnership with local authoritiesled to some tension. The demise of the GLCalso saw us inheriting the conservation functions of their Historic Buildings Division.

One of the biggest managerial problemswas to weld staff coming from different backgrounds into a united body working tothe same aims and procedures. Civil servantswere well accustomed to Civil Service codesand government accounting rules but onesignificant change did await them. Working ina body more directly answerable to the publicinvolved a more responsive attitude than somehad been used to in the past. Staff comingfrom local authorities had to adapt to a different set of rules from those to which

they were accustomed. The greatest problems,however, were encountered by staff comingfrom the private sector, especially those frommarketing backgrounds. They found the rulesarcane, bureaucratic and inhibiting to theurgency urged upon them. The temptation to push on too fast probably led to a criticalInternal Audit draft report that was leaked tothe national press. Inevitably Ministers wereconcerned and much time was spent preparing a response tabled in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament. It was time that could have been spent profitably on other issues, but lessons were learned.

The first period in the life of EnglishHeritage came to an end on April . On that date seconded staff committing themselves to English Heritage ceased to becivil servants. It was a relief that the greatmajority chose to stay. On the same date wetook over conservation staff from the GLC’sHistoric Buildings Division and those at thethree historic house museums, some of themcoming with a distinct lack of enthusiasm.That same day was also marked by a fundamental reorganisation. For the first twoyears, we continued with the DoE structurewhereby professional staff worked within theirown professional groups. After a managementreview, we worked as interdisciplinary teams.It was a vast improvement and one that waswelcomed by the staff.

There were mistakes, frustrations andconsiderable pressures in the early years butthey were massively outweighed by theexcitement and enjoyment of creating a new and positive force for the benefit ofconservation and the public. I hope that allthose involved – and in particular MichaelHeseltine, Edward Montagu and JenniferJenkins -can look back in pleasure at whatwas achieved and on what English Heritagehas become.

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: The creation and early days of EH


Lord Montagu, the firstchairman of EnglishHeritage, and the thenPrime Minister, MargaretThatcher, flanked by thefirst chief executive andcommissioners, 1984.

© C

row

n co

pyrig

ht

Since its foundation in , EnglishHeritage has been very fortunate that whatever government has been in office, thehistoric environment has never been a party-political issue. All the main legislation, fromthe Ancient Monuments Act to theNational Heritage Act , received cross-party support. In her pamphlet Better Places to Live, published shortly before the recentelection was called, Tessa Jowell reflected abroad political consensus when she wrote thatthe role of government in relation to thehistoric environment was to provide ‘vision,leadership and support, including publicinvestment as necessary’. English Heritage’sfirst years were spent under a Conservativegovernment and the next years under aLabour one, but one of the most obviouscharacteristics of the government’s attitude to the heritage has been its continuity.

When I worked in a government financedivision in the s I found that my deskinstructions began with a Treasury minuteissued by Gladstone and it is no surprise that one of the continuities of public administration has been the concern, forwhich Gladstone was famed, for economy and efficiency. In the early s, there was amajor drive for privatisation, which saw thetransfer of English Heritage’s direct labourforce to the private sector and the closure ofits specialist craft studios. In the wider sector,the introduction of compulsory competitivetendering in local authorities led to thecontracting out of parks departments and theloss of one the main entry routes into horti-culture. The sector skills council, with helpfrom English Heritage, is only now beginningto address the resulting skills shortage.

More recently, the introduction of resourceaccounting has led to increasing pressure ondepartments to divest themselves of property

with a high capital value. DCMS hassupported the work of English Heritage’sGovernment Historic Estates Unit in advisingon disposals, while departments’ overall stewardship responsibilities towards thehistoric sites and buildings in their care areenshrined in the Protocol for the Care of theGovernment Historic Estate issued by DCMSin , which has now been adopted as partof the government’s Framework forSustainable Development.

A related and equally ever-present issue hasbeen the government’s concern to keep to aminimum the burden of regulation on theeconomy. Successive attempts have beenmade to make the planning and listed buildingsystems as simple and consensual as possible.There is a fair case to be made that EnglishHeritage, by providing authoritative advicewith the minimum of delay (it now turnsround between per cent and per cent of consultations within days) has donemore than most to oil the regulatory wheelsof the planning system, the generic problemsof which are usually the result of the need toensure that all the necessary checks andbalances are in place when people’s propertyrights are involved.

Another common strand is the need fordemocratic accountability and communityparticipation. English Heritage derives its ownlegitimacy by being accountable throughministers to Parliament, and by being transparent in its operations; it chose to anticipate the demands of the Freedom ofInformation Act several years before theywere imposed by law. One of its originalfunctions, which it retains, was to alert ministers to cases where the wider publicinterest would be best served by calling listedbuilding consent applications in for nationaldecision. In recent years, the need to find



England’s HeritageThe changing role of governmentJeff West Policy Director

The historic environment enjoys broad cross-partysupport, but has not always been well served by themachinery of government.

new and more effective ways of engagingpeople in the management of their local environment has led to the development ofLocal Strategic Partnerships and communityplans, and the introduction of Statements of Community Involvement as part of theplanning process. English Heritage’s mostrecent contribution to this debate was thepublication earlier this year of our guidanceon Local Strategic Partnerships and the HistoricEnvironment, but five years ago the sector ledthe way (and anticipated the Planning GreenPaper) by emphasising the importance ofcommunity participation in Power of Place. In many ways this was a defining moment.Criticised by some for being too politicallycorrect, and by others for not saying anythingnew or interesting, the final report emergedfrom a wide consultative process that introduced ministers and civil servants to ideas that had been gaining ground in theacademic world over the previous twodecades, in particular the concept of multiplesignificance and the necessity of mediatingcontested values.

The other main issue with which Power of Place began to grapple, and which is nowbearing important fruit through the work of the Heritage Protection Review, was theessential unity of the historic environment,and the pointlessness of some of the traditional subdivisions into which the heritage sector has been divided. These divisions had beenexacerbated by the way in which governmentwas organised and legislation enacted. The first Ancient Monuments Act gaveguardianship powers to the Office of Works,and its successor Departments retained responsibility for archaeology and archaeological monuments for nearly years.The Planning Act nevertheless made theMinistry of Town and Country Planningresponsible for listed buildings, and the ghostsof this cultural divide (which allowed historicdesigned landscape to fall between the stools)persisted into the early years of EnglishHeritage. The abolition of the old AncientMonuments Board and Historic BuildingsCouncil when English Heritage was set upwas sweetened by requiring the new body to establish ‘at least one committee’ to adviseit on ancient monuments and at least one on historic buildings. English Heritage subsequently decided that it made more sense – given that the historic environmentdoes not naturally divide along statutory lines– for it to be one and the same committee. In the meantime, the government’s PlanningPolicy Guidance Note on Archaeology and

Planning (PPG, published in ) and Note on Planning and the HistoricEnvironment (PPG, published in )perpetuated the idea that (in some minds atleast) archaeology stopped at ground level, orpossibly at some time in the first millenniumCE. The language in Power of Place was therefore deliberately inclusive, talking aboutthe environment as a whole rather thanmaking a distinction between sites and buildings. Since then, the government hasadopted a similarly inclusive approach, both in its policy statement, A Force for OurFuture, and subsequently in its review ofheritage protection.

Over the past years this joining up ofthe historic environment has been paralleledby a similar joining up of the some of thebodies dealing with it. English Heritage itselfhas been merged, first in with theHistoric Buildings Division of the formerGreater London Council, and then in with the Royal Commission on the HistoricalMonuments of England. This has meant thatthe several of the most powerful traditions ofpublic-sector engagement with the historicenvironment – the Office of Works, theMinistry of Housing and Local Government,the London County Council, the RoyalCommission, the Ordnance SurveyArchaeology Division, the Survey of Londonand the National Buildings Record – all beganto flow in the same direction for perhaps thefirst time. Meanwhile, the governmentdepartments responsible for the historic environment have continued to evolve. TheDepartment of National Heritage emergedfrom the Office of Arts and Libraries and theDepartment of the Environment, and changedits name to the Department for Culture,Media and Sport when ‘heritage’ no longerseemed the appropriate word to cover sport,broadcasting and the creative industries. The department responsible for the planningsystem first lost its responsibility for transport,and then in its responsibility for theenvironment. Given the cross-cutting natureof the historic environment, which has never been easy to keep within simple administrative boundaries, it was thereforeparticularly encouraging when in ODPM and Defra joined DCMS as jointsignatories of English Heritage’s fundingagreement. It is was probably this, rather than the mere passing of years, that markedthe historic environment’s real coming of ageas a proper concern for government.

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: England’s heritage


A year or two before English Heritage was created, I was invited to join a group ofadvisers connected with one of theCountryside Commission’s demonstrationfarms. The idea of this scheme was that practitioners from different branches of environmental conservation should cometogether on a number of farms, and suggestpractical, low-cost ways of improving theircare. We started by compiling theme-specificplans – nature conservation, amenity, archaeology and so on – and then combinedthem into a plan for the farm as a whole.Once there were results to see, the farmerwould invite other farmers from the region to visit. In this way, the thinking went, goodpractice would spread.

One day, a land-use consultant (from athen-famous firm) mentioned another of thefarms where he’d been a few days before.‘The archaeologists down there’, he confided,‘have gone bananas.’ I asked him why.

‘There’s a concrete pillbox on the farm,’ – his laugh had a hint of hysteria – ‘and they’resaying that we should keep it!’

No one would be scandalised by thatsuggestion today. If anything, the opposite,for apart from the nature conservation valueof pillboxes (which make excellent bat roosts),the UK’s anti-invasion defences have emergedas designed landscapes in their own right.That is, instead of being seen as extraneous tothe historic environment, they are nowaccepted as part of it – as of course (beingsited with the closest regard for terrain andhuman geography) they always were.

Does this contrast of attitudes tell us muchabout the evolution of conservation, orindeed research, during the intervening quarter century? Arguably, it does, in fourrespects.

First, it is significant that while the HighlyRespected Environmental Consultant saw noconnection between a s pillbox andarchaeology, the archaeological adviser at theother demonstration farm certainly did. Thisreminds us that a number of the developmentswe retrospectively attribute to the s ands were drawn from ideas that werealready gaining currency outside the statesector. The first edition of James SempleKerr’s The Conservation Plan, for instance, wasin print before English Heritage was formed,while the move from a reductionist to a holistic approach towards landscape was takingplace at least from the s. This was partlybecause of what had been going on in thefield, both on a broad front and in specificareas since the s (Professor MauriceBeresford, W G Hoskins, Dartmoor as a‘demonstration landscape’) and through workwhich afforded particular insights (the building of motorways, aggregate extraction,aerial reconnaissance). By the time EnglishHeritage arrived on the scene, the consequences of such work were already



English HeritageThe view from a CommissionerRichard Morris English Heritage Commissioner 1996–2005

New holistic ways of thinking are transforming the way in which we approach conservation and research.

Dunstanburgh,Northumberland.A Second World Warpillbox, to repel invasionfrom the Europeanmainland, lies beside acastle built six centuriesbefore to defend againstdomestic unrest. Recentfield survey has in turnrevealed that themedieval castle wasconstructed on the siteof an Iron Age hillfort.

Al O

swal

d ©

Eng

lish

Her

itage

being factored into more general thinking.Late in the s, the Council for BritishArchaeology’s Countryside Committeepreached the death of the concept of ‘site’,and urged an approach to conservation thatwas ‘ecologically conceived’ – a phrase thatprovoked amusement at the time, but turnsout to have been a bellwether for what hashappened since: the transfer of ideas and practice from the natural environment.

Arguably, the s interest in landscapewas one reason why the ‘archaeological areas’provided for under the Ancient Monumentsand Archaeological Areas Act turned outto be such a disappointment, since theyprovided only for access to record sites threatened by development in lieu of themore systematic stewardship that has sincebeen provided for by PPG. Even PPGfalls short of where landscape thinkers had got to by the time of English Heritage’s birth, since its prime concern is with point-specific sites rather than surroundings, neigh-bourhoods or character.

Thus far, then, English Heritage’s achieve-ment looks to have been evolutionary ratherthan revolutionary, building out from andbeyond the th-century monument-basedtradition not by replacing it but by assimilat-ing newer approaches to it. In anotherrespect, however, PPG reflects a third issuethat arises from the pillbox on the demonstra-tion farm –the advance of the claims ofcommunity and individual on the past.

Much of the early interest in PPG turnedon its success in shifting responsibility for thecommissioning of rescue archaeology. In the government told developers that in futurethey themselves should make provision for the archaeological consequences of theirschemes. There were several motives for this.One was that whereas government fundingwould never be sufficient for all there is todo, a ‘polluter pays’ approach is more directlyproportional to the extent and impact of whatthere is to be paid for. Another was based in a morality of safekeeping, in part borrowedfrom Charles Rothschild’s* dictum of natureconservation, that ‘the only effective methodof protecting nature is to interfere with it aslittle as possible’. Archaeologists had no moreright to go about annihilating archaeologicaldeposits than zoologists were licensed todestroy wildlife.

Such views had further roots in a widened

sense of community, whereby archaeologywas coming to be regarded as a resource foreveryone to use, in their own ways. Hence,the fact that one group had an academic interest in archaeological evidence (that is,one sort of understanding, out of many possible kinds) should not confer pre-eminence in decisions about what shouldhappen to it. If academics wished to destroysites by digging them up, they now had totake the public with them.

Of course, in one way this is just what theplanning system is for – a mechanism to makepublicly reasoned choices between competingclaims on land. Significantly, the areas wherethe planning system is weakest, or where forlegal reasons it does not touch, tend also to be those that have produced the greatestcontroversies (like Seahenge) or problematics(like plough damage).

A corollary has still to be faced. The planning system, local authorities, the contractsector and elements within English Heritageitself all still refer to ‘preservation by record’ –a phrase founded in the notion (latelyadvanced in another context by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport) that arecord may be sufficient proxy for a thingdestroyed. Yet Darwin himself warned of thefallacy of value-free recording. Looking backat the intellectual condition of geology in thes he recalled a school of thought that saidthat a geologist’s job was not to theorise butto observe:

I well remember someone saying that atthis rate a man might as well go into agravel-pit and count the pebbles anddescribe the colours. How odd it is thatanyone should not see that all observationmust be for or against some view if it is to be of any service.

The point here is that an archive relates notprimarily to the thing itself, but to the questions asked of it. The ‘data’ beloved ofarchaeologists and keepers of HERs (HistoricEnvironment Records) arguably do not existin any useful sense independently of the questions that call them into being. Greaterthan the need for new methods or systems ofdata gathering and manipulation, therefore, isthe need for a continuing flow of new andmore interesting questions. The facilitation of that flow, at base, is what English Heritageshould be about.

If this be accepted, it brings an extradynamic to what conservation is, and who it is for. Traditionally, conservation has been

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: A Commissioner’s view


* –. Rothschild was an amateur naturalist whofounded the Society for the Promotion of NatureReserves (now the Royal Society for NatureConservation) in .

thought of as the selective cherishing of thingson behalf of posterity, in the long term, andfor public recreation and education in theshort. It might better be visualised as anextension of ourselves (just as it was, indeed,in the thinking of Ruskin or the Sierra Club a hundred years and more ago), the cherishingbeing less for the supply of research thanbeing supplied by it. Moreover, the last years have seen an expanding definition ofwho ‘we’ are, from a fairly tight academiccircle whose members told government andpublic alike what they should find interesting,a cultural counterpart to the fluoridation ofwater, to anyone who wishes to take part. To say this is not to concede any of the rigourthat is required for exercising such interest.

A final thought: that pillbox. Two ofarchaeology’s largest recent steps have been its extension into the marine environment,and the breaking down of the idea (once

hard-wired into the Royal Commission’swarrant) that architectural history and archaeology were concerned only with amore distant past. (The phenomenal advanceof family history may have had something to do with this, for millions have seen forthemselves their own connectedness withmore recently historical people and events.)Both call for adjustment to archaeology’s relationships with other disciplines. The material legacy of the recent (as of thedrowned) past is of course enormous, but so too are the written and graphical sources for its study that lie preserved in our nationaland local archives. When we choose toconserve the physical remains of that past inthe landscape it is thus no longer necessarilyfor traditional scientific question-askingreasons, but for broader social and culturalpurposes, as tokens of historical events inwhich many fellow citizens took part.

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: A Commissioner’s view


A Dorset tractor driverencroaches on a BronzeAge round barrow – an island of historypreserved uncomfort-ably in a sea of intensivearable cultivation.

NM

R 23

801/

005

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

The Heritage Lottery Fund

Can it really be years since that day inApril , when those former civil servantsdonned the t-shirt with the shiny new redcorporate logo and started to grapple withwhat independence from Government wouldmean in practice? What follows is a personalview from one who jumped ship before theMillennium to join another national heritagebody – the National Heritage Memorial Fund– itself celebrating its th anniversary thisyear.

So much of what we take for granted todaywas in not yet in place. English Heritagehad to address the need for massive changesboth in the way it operated and in its relationships with the outside world. Andthen in just as things were settling down along came lottery money. For EnglishHeritage, only years old, dealing with the disappointment of not being given thislargesse, and then having to manage theunruly and seemingly ill-prepared HeritageLottery Fund (HLF) into ways which wouldbe beneficial, was yet another complexity.Attitudes to the lottery were at first ambivalent. How much money would therebe? Would it be a potential source of fundingfor English Heritage’s own projects? Howwould the vexed question of additionality beanswered?

At first, the relationship between EnglishHeritage and HLF was wary. HLF was veryreliant on the wisdom of some other agencies, including English Heritage, and hadyet to develop its special role as a grant-givingbody. But as HLF has gained a greater senseof purpose, through two strategic plans andthe widening of its role and ambitions, so itsown perceptions about, and reliance onEnglish Heritage has changed. The partnershipnow operates on a number of levels –

strategic, research and policy, operational andadvisory – where English Heritage and HLFare clearer about each other’s requirementsand strengths. HLF have been able to award anumber of key grants that have solved somelarge-scale conservation problems (for example, the Anderton Boat lift, StoweHouse and All Saints Hereford) as well asseveral awards to English Heritage itself, fromwhich its visitors have benefited (ElthamPalace, Chiswick House, Whitby Abbey,Witley Court and Down House), and there is currently a commitment from HLF to makea substantial grant available to resolve theproblems at Stonehenge. We have cooperatedfor more than eight years now on grants forplaces of worship in England, and receivedadvice from English Heritage on many



The View from OurPartnersWorking in a common cause

Today the historic environment has become a shared task for the voluntary, private and public sectors.

The 1875 AndertonBoat Lift at Northwich,Cheshire, whose £7mrestoration to workingorder was supportedwith a £3.3m grant fromHLF and much carefuladvice from EH aboutits conservation.

Paul

Hig

hnam

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

thousands of individual building projects scattered throughout the country. There havealso been joint innovations – the introductionof conservation management planning forexample, and the two-stage process – both ofwhich are about making better decisions onprojects. It is a sign of HLF’s growing maturity and a sense of its own priorities thatEnglish Heritage’s advice is not always actedon: HLF has become a more demandingclient with a clear view of the issues on whichwe need advice.

HLF’s relationship with English Heritageover the years has thus become ever morecomplex, more multi-faceted. There is muchstill to be done on joint advocacy for thehistoric environment, research on the needs ofthe sector and devising the most appropriateand productive ways of dealing with theheritage problems and opportunities thatremain. Lottery money has been a massiveforce for good for the UK’s heritage for thelast years, and English Heritage’s wisecounsels and patient advice have played amajor part in that success. We could not havedone it without you. Many happy returns!

Stephen JohnsonDirector of Operations, Heritage Lottery Fund

Historic Houses Association

When people think ‘stately homes’, they tendto think National Trust and English Heritage.In fact, there are more privately owned housesopen to the public than those owned by all

the national bodies combined. Moreover, it isnot simply the large houses that are in thisownership: it is generally estimated that two-thirds of Britain’s built and national heritage is owned, cared for and above all financiallymaintained by private individuals.

For these owners their relationship withEnglish Heritage is important and falls into thefollowing categories: grants, regulatory andadvisory.

: Through the s, historic houseswere among the principal recipients of grantaid, in recognition of both their nationalimportance and their perilous state. This aidnot only saved a threatened sector but alsosubsequently enabled impressive economicand social delivery – not unlike the HeritageDividend derived from English Heritage’swork in the urban environment.

More recently, given the Government’srefusal to provide fiscal relief for maintenance,grant aid has become the only support for the private owner and indeed is the routeadvocated by Government to assist this sector.However, the aid available is now muchreduced and funds are spread more widely.The ring-fenced scheme for historic houseshas ended. In addition, the devolution ofgrant decisions to regions, attended by socialconditions, makes it harder for private ownersto benefit. The situation is serious in thelonger term and needs to be addressed.

: Protection is certainlywelcomed by owners, as is English Heritage’sprofessional and informed input into designation arrangements. English Heritage’sefforts to establish a more client-friendlyphilosophy are appreciated by owners andseem to be recognised within EnglishHeritage’s hierarchy – with whom theHistoric Houses Association (HHA) enjoyspositive relations both in London and in theRegions. But owners still report isolatedinstances of inflexible response, agenda-drivenreaction and bureaucratic delay.

: In the past, a situation existedwhere English Heritage officials wereinvolved both as advisers and with the arbitrators on planning appeals. Less so now.Owners find English Heritage advice to beprofessional and informed, that it recognisesrealities and is generally helpful and supportiveof major projects, particularly when ownersface uninformed, biased and locally drivensituations.

English Heritage’s marked success in developing and promoting their own

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: The view from our partners


A group from BlackEnvironment Network iswelcomed to TissingtonHall, Derbyshire, by itsowner, Sir RichardFitzherbert.

Jam

es D

avie

s ©

Eng

lish

Her

itage

properties has created competition in acrowded heritage-attraction market. Good for English Heritage. But this competition,funded with Government money, actuallydisadvantages a sector English Heritage existsto support.

These comments are those of an old andsupportive friend of English Heritage. Noneof them lessens HHA’s regard for the organisation and its recognition of EnglishHeritage’s essential function, dedicated staffand leadership role in promoting the existence and importance of the historic builtenvironment in England. The private sector iswell represented in the strategic councils thatEnglish Heritage over the last few years has sohelpfully orchestrated on behalf of the sectoras a whole.

The HHA urges Government to backEnglish Heritage politically and financially so that English Heritage can fulfil its role insupport of the privately owned heritage, an important element of its constituency.

Richard WilkinDirector-General, Historic Houses Association

The voluntary movement and English Heritage

Michael Heseltine’s decision to set up EnglishHeritage came with the unanimous blessing of the National Amenity Societies, and thesense of partnership remains. EnglishHeritage’s grant regimes and its caseworkpolicy have always subscribed to the philosophy expounded by the Society for theProtection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB). Itwas the Twentieth Century Society that gavepassion to the campaign to list post-SecondWorld War buildings. And English Heritageand the societies together continue to fightthe corner on VAT.

The societies, however, can afford to bemore overtly passionate, less ‘reasonable’. And yet English Heritage is big enough tooverlook intermittent outbursts of dissent.Indeed one of the prize exhibits of the JointCommittee is a letter from Sir Jocelyn Stevenssaying that however independent minded wemight be, the grant we all receive to sustainour work each year from English Heritagewould never be jeopardised.

Richard Morris and Jane Grenville are only the most lofty examples of constantcross-fertilisation of personnel betweenEnglish Heritage and the societies. It was thesocieties which gave their first jobs to thepresent Head of the North-East Region,

Carole Pyrah, and a good smattering ofinspectors such as Trevor Mitchell, AndrewDerrick, John Neale and Rory O’Donnell.

In its years English Heritage has alwaysrecognised the importance of tapping voluntary effort. Increasingly in theTransforming Casework agenda, the defenceof Grade II-listed buildings is left largely tothe societies. The most explicit deference on Grade IIs is in the regime for the protection of historic planned landscapes:English Heritage’s partnership with theGarden History Society quite expresslyprovides for the latter to deal with Grade II-registered sites alone.

The Friends of War Memorials (recentlyrechristened the War Memorial Trust) areeven partners in a discrete grant regime – isthis the first time that a society rather than asister quango has been chosen to distributeEnglish Heritage grant aid?

None of us can match, or aim to match,English Heritage’s portfolio of vestedproperties but, with English Heritage’s help,the Victorian Society now runs its ownmuseum at Linley Sambourne House inKensington. The Ancient Monuments Societyfunds the administrative expenses of its sisterorganisation, the Friends of FriendlessChurches, which owns disused but historicplaces of worship, and educational partnerships will no doubt come increasinglyto the fore. English Heritage sponsored theSPAB’s first National Maintenance Week, and its Barns Campaign of some years ago.

English Heritage and the societies are



Temple Bar in its newlocation adjacent to St Paul’s Cathedral.Originally rescued fromdemolition in 1877–8 by the Meux family,who moved it to theircountry estate, it wasfinally re-erected inLondon as a result of a private charitableinitiative supported byEnglish Heritage and the National AmenitySocieties.

© M

atth

ew S

aund

ers

partners and like all chums will occasionallysnap at each other. But in a role reversalworthy of ‘Absolutely Fabulous’ we are wontto embarrass our child albeit by episodic irreverence and a passion that will notcompromise.

Matthew SaundersSecretary of the Joint Committee of the NationalAmenity Societies (until February ), Secretaryof the Ancient Monuments Society

Church repair grants

English Heritage grants for places of worshipare now so well established that it is surprisingto remember that state aid for churches onlybegan in . The Church of England’sparallel agreement to review its own controlsled to the Care of Churches and EcclesiasticalJurisdiction Measure , bringing increasedcollaboration with other partners, includingEnglish Heritage, to the operation of thefaculty jurisdiction system.

Since , English Heritage has offeredsome £m in total, benefiting around churches a year. Grant offers started at£.m in /, peaked at £m in/, and since then have usually hoveredaround £m per year.

The scheme has evolved considerably.Originally, English Heritage assessed whethereach individual church was ‘outstanding’ (andso fitted within its legal remit) before grantcould even be considered. In ‘outstand-ingness’ became tied to listing grade. Thismade all Grade I or II* churches theoreticallyeligible, but excluded all Grade II buildings –thereby restricting the scope for grant-aidingmany th-century urban churches anddenominations without many highly gradedchurches. Demand for grants has always beengreater than the money available, and in someyears the annual budget was offered very earlyin the financial year, leaving great pent-updemand from other applicants. Over time, thecriteria for eligible works have become con-siderably tighter, and assessment of parishes’financial need increasingly rigorous. Applicantsmust always find some match funding – achallenge both energising and daunting.

The greatest change, however, was theintroduction of a joint scheme with theHeritage Lottery Fund in . This introduced welcome new money, doubling or more the amounts available, and widenedthe scheme to include Grade II buildings,although not all places of worship wish toaccept lottery money.

While procedures are now more complexfor applicants than in , the current systemof batching applications enables relative priorities to be assessed together. ‘Stage ’grants for development work also supportapplicants in working up their scheme totender stage, and enable firmer assessment of the actual contract costs.

What of the future? Welcome as the grantsare, they are still insufficient to meet theneeds. Outstanding repairs in two Church of England dioceses alone, Norwich andChelmsford, could sweep up all the £mavailable from the joint scheme for the lastfinancial year. The Archbishops’ Council isworking with English Heritage to quantifymore clearly these outstanding repair needs;we need firm facts to make a case toGovernment for greater funding. Our historicchurches play a major part in our landscapesand communities: we believe they deserveeven greater support. But meanwhile, weshould celebrate the real contribution thescheme has made to the good state of repairof so many of our churches.

Paula Griffiths Head of Cathedral and Church Buildings Division,Archbishops’ Council



Repair work from thescheme’s middle years –Rushford church,Norfolk, 1995.

St Botolph’s, Hardham,Sussex, 1995. EnglishHeritage supportedconservation and monitoring of theseearly medieval wallpaintings.

© P

aula

Grif

fiths

© P

aula

Grif

fiths

A local authority perspective

In years English Heritage’s partner localauthorities have also been subject to challenge,reorganisation and review. We are nowexpected to enable the delivery of customer-orientated services, to effectively measure our performance and to deliver joined-upcommunity leadership. We aim to sustainablyregenerate our communities accounting forenvironmental, social and economic factorsand incorporating them into spatial strategies.Has English Heritage enabled, supported andcontributed to this new local agenda?

In the early years local authorities wererecipients of advice, decisions and grants relating to historic buildings and areas. Thesewere essentially decisions taken at the centrefollowing national agendas and then implantedinto local authorities.

Over time this has rebalanced, givinggreater weight to regional and local agendas.There has also been recognition that to securelocal ownership of policy or process there has to be understanding of its evolution andrelevance. The key to this change was theconcept of ‘significance’, recognised inLincoln in several ways.

The Lincoln Archaeological ResearchAssessment (LARA) is an outstandingpiece of academic archaeological work. It isalso visually appealing and readable. It hasenabled successful community-based workwithin some of the country’s most deprivedwards. It has led directly to agreement withEnglish Heritage to test this approach indeveloping an innovative Lincoln TownscapeAssessment, which will use characterisationand significance as cornerstones.

In parallel the City Council and local partners have seized with enthusiasm therequirement to produce academically literatebut readable conservation plans. This startedwith a suite of plans for the cathedral andclose, castle and medieval palace and has beenfollowed by other building-specific plans andalso an area-based Roman MonumentsConservation Plan. This has enabled localcommunity support for monuments in theirmidst. The City Council was subsequentlylobbied by these same communities for greaterfunding for the care and display of theirmonuments.At a wider level the city was an early beneficiary of a visit by the joint EnglishHeritage / Commission for the BuiltEnvironment (CABE) Urban Panel. The city’s prime regeneration areas were subject to scrutiny and a commitment to the

master-planning of the Brayford andFlaxengate area was agreed by the CityCouncil and its national partners.

The prime driver for change in theBrayford area has been the city’s new university. A master-plan was commissionedfrom Rick Mather and is now being implemented. Each project, whether newbuild or conservation led, is carefully considered against the principles of themaster-plan.

In the Flaxengate English Heritage hasparticipated as a founding member of theLindum Hillside Partnership, which wasinstrumental in the delivery of conservationplans, master-planning and characterisation. A new museum will be opening in summer as a centrepiece for the regeneration ofthis area. English Heritage as well as CABEhave played major roles in evolving the designby Panter Hudspith for this important addition to the historic environment.

The City Council has a strapline – ‘HistoricCity; Contemporary City’. This aptlydescribes our approach to our understandingand ownership of our community asset.English Heritage can be said to have played,and be playing, a proactive role to ensure that our historic environment is truly at theheart of our city’s regeneration.

Keith LaidlerDirector of Development and EnvironmentalServices, City of Lincoln Council



Great CentralWarehouse Library,University of Lincoln.In May 2005 therestoration of this fineindustrial building at risk received a RoyalInstitution of CharteredSurveyors gold award for buildingconservation and a silver award for regeneration.

© L

inco

ln C

ity C

ounc

il

The developer’s perspective

The development industry’s relationship withthe historic environment and its champion,English Heritage, is, like the ‘curate’s egg’,good in parts. On the one hand we have thewell-publicised conflicts such as the car-parkramp in Soho, Bishopsgate Goods Yard andthe Heron Tower. On the other, there arethe less newsworthy developments such asRegent Street, the Bullring in Birminghamand Woolwich Arsenal, where the historicenvironment has been preserved andharnessed to increase development potentialand community participation.

Conflict, even if it affects only a relativelysmall number of planned developments, iswasteful and time-consuming for both sides.We have made considerable progress over thelast few years in arriving at a modus operandithat allows economic development needs tobe reconciled with the preservation of ourheritage. But there is still more to do toachieve harmonious cooperation for alldevelopment projects.

Early consultation, an improved understanding of the other’s point of view anda willingness on both sides to compromise arethe essential ingredients. The developmentindustry understands the need for buildings ofhistoric importance to be preserved. But therewill come a point in many projects when thebenefits to be gained in heritage terms areoutweighed by the economic degradationimposed on the scheme. Balanced, well-informed and early consultation should allow

for those trade-offs to be made at a time inthe project’s life when there is still room formanoeuvre on both sides.

Many of the changes that are being made to English Heritage’s method of operation are to be welcomed. Indeed it seems incon-ceivable that a property owner should not be given prior notice of an intention to listnor have the opportunity to appeal againstthat decision. Equally it is entirely right thatbuildings that are being considered for listingshould be protected from the rogue ownerwho decides to get in quickly with the demolition ball. None of us want anotherFirestone Factory!

We also welcome English Heritage’s newfocus on management agreements to lookafter historic assets. Provided these are sympathetic both to the needs of preservationand the need for modernisation and economicsustainability, then property owners, conservationists and the community will all benefit.

But I believe there are further changes thatcould be made to reinforce the culture ofcooperation and consultation. First, EnglishHeritage should be more ready to embracebroader economic issues when consideringdevelopment plans that involve heritage assets.Secondly, historic building specialists shouldreceive some broad-based economic andregeneration training so that they understandthe cost implications of developments involving listed buildings. Thirdly, EnglishHeritage should take a more flexible approachto alterations and modernisation of historicassets to fit them for a modern usage, preferably as an integral part of a community,even when that means some historic featuresmight be irrevocably altered or lost. After all, most historic buildings have alreadyundergone substantial change over thecenturies to fit them for the most appropriateusage of the time. And lastly, the propertydevelopment and investment industry shouldwork with English Heritage to devise a simplememorandum of understanding between thedevelopment and heritage communities forthe handling of all projects that includehistoric assets.

Both sides have more work to do to ensurethat they understand and appreciate where the other is coming from. The developmentindustry has felt at times over the last yearsthat the odds have been stacked against itwhere historic assets are concerned. The aspiration for the next years should be tomake the developer view his historic assetsnot as a huge disadvantage to be overcome in



. . . and less of this.

Developers and EnglishHeritage need to worktogether to achievemore of this . . .

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge©

Eng

lish

Her

itage

a battle against the forces of preservation but as an asset that, with the support of theheritage specialists, he can turn to the advantage of himself and the community.

We look forward to working with EnglishHeritage to turn that aspiration into a reality.

Liz PeaceChief Executive, British Property Federation

The holistic landscape approach to wildlife conservation

The English landscape is a cultural landscapedeveloped through the rich history of man’sinteraction with the land and wildlife.Consequently, the habitats and species that arehighly valued today are intimately interwovenwith the historic environment. The mostimportant places for wildlife, the Sites ofSpecial Scientific Interest and National NatureReserves, should safeguard the diversity andgeographical range of the best of England’shabitats, species, geological and physiographicfeatures. When small and isolated, however,these sites cannot sustain their biodiversityindefinitely and they need to be linked into a wider network by suitable habitats throughwhich species can move and adapt to theeffects of climate change.

Work to restore wildlife has traditionallyfocused on individual habitats and speciesseparately. This has not always taken accountof how habitats fit together in the landscape,and has allowed us to miss opportunities towork with others, both to restore andenhance wildlife habitats and landscapes andto reduce the impacts on them. Fundamentallythis process is about achieving end results thatare both environmentally and economicallysustainable. Over the last few years, landscape-scale schemes addressing wildlife, landscape,cultural and historic issues have been developed. These link to local character,community values and needs, and enhance thepotential for sustainable economic benefit.

The policy statement supporting the forthcoming Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill stresses the need tocontinue this approach and address ‘bothhistoric buildings and landscape in an integrated manner. Better partnership working… will … ensure a more holistic approach to managing the natural and historic environment…forming a lasting foundationon which to build sustainable communities.’

There is already a well-established partnership between English Nature, EnglishHeritage and the Countryside Agency to carry

out projects and produce joint publicationsand guidance. At a landscape scale, these have included Natural Areas/CountrysideCharacter work, the Parkland and Wood-Pasture Habitat Action Plan and individual landscape visions.

The holistic landscape approach can help us to understand the totality of the past, set asustainable vision for the future and enhanceenjoyment and appreciation. Bringing thehistoric, cultural and natural environmentstogether improves the targeting of agri-environment schemes, and through the Rural Delivery Frameworks, increases the contribution that the historic and naturalenvironment make to social (community) andeconomic development. It links the targets tothe planning system and ensures that the nextEngland Rural Development Programme



Peveril Castle in thePeak District NationalPark lies within theCastleton Site of Special ScientificInterest, noted for its limestone geologyand species-rich limestone grassland androck-ledge plants.

Pete

r Wak

eley

© E

nglis

h N

atur

e

embeds the natural, cultural and historic environment both as a core objective and as a core contribution to wider economic and social well-being.

Rachel ThomasRelationship Manager, English NatureTracey SlavenDirector, Countryside Agency, Landscape,Access and Recreation

English Heritage and Black Environment Network

The historic environment can enrich everyone’s lives. Black Environment Network(BEN) is proud to work with EnglishHeritage to develop the BEN HistoricEnvironment Programme for England tomake the historic environment accessible to everyone, something with which thewhole of society can identify and engage. Our partnership is a journey through policydevelopment into practical action. It grew out of our membership of the DCMSSteering Group for the Review of Policiesrelating to the Historic Environment ofEngland, and our present work within theHistoric Environment Executive Committee.

Our partnership with English Heritage isabout the coming together of our distinctivestrengths and expertise to develop new experiences of the historic environment that are appropriate and relevant to ethniccommunities. This is against a background of disconnection, with concerns that what issignificant to them is overlooked or neglected.

English Heritage is leading by example. It has put into place an internal frameworkwhich underpins partnership with organisations such as ourselves to involvepeople and broaden access. One of its directors, Deborah Lamb, is designated itsDiversity Champion. There is a Head ofSocial Inclusion, Nyla Naseer, and anOutreach Team, headed by Miriam Levin.These are courageous strategic moves, withinan extensive organisation with strongly traditional ways of working. There is now agrowing awareness and commitment thatforms a basis for developing a programme ofinitiatives together across the many linkedthemes that enable the delivery of socialinclusion. These initiatives include trainingmodules for front-line staff and volunteers inthe skills needed to appropriately welcomeethnic-minority visitors and involving ethnic-community groups in designing guided tours with an accent on the holistic

multicultural interpretation of the history of particular objects originating from different cultures.

The facilitation of a working relationshipbetween members of ethnic-communitygroups and the expert staff of English Heritageand other heritage organisations is one of our key roles within the BEN HistoricEnvironment Programme for England. On the one hand, we may be supportingmembers of ethnic groups to have a voice in identifying meaningful project themes,making decisions or evaluating the success of the endeavour. On the other hand, we maybe working with English Heritage or otherheritage organisations in supporting a range of properties for an introductory programmeof enjoyable destinations for ethnic groups, as in the ‘People and Historic Places Project’with the Historic Houses Association.Partnership work is framed within the recognition that members of ethnic communities are British citizens – aspects of history relating to their cultural origins are set within a holistic history of Britain.

We look forward to a continued fruitfulpartnership with English Heritage.

Judy Ling Wong OBE, FRSA,Hon FCIWEMUK Director, Black Environment Network

Developing the professionals:English Heritage and the institutes

The Institute of Field Archaeologists (IFA) is the professional institute concerned withpromoting best practice in archaeology, and the Institute of Historic BuildingConservation (IHBC) is the multi-disciplinarybody for conservation professionals andspecialists. Over the last years conservationof the historic environment has changed enormously. The messages of ‘Power of Place’



Reinterpreting Witley Court. In this consultation projectmembers of differentethnic communitiesvisited the site andadvised English Heritageon how to make theirexperience more accessible and culturallyrelevant.

Suza

nne

Car

ter

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

– history is everywhere, and it’s everybody’s –are still slowly percolating through politics and the professions. We have seen a massiveincrease in developer funding for archaeology,a broadening of the archaeological remit and a concomitant increase in specialisation.Meanwhile conservation of historic places,urban and rural, has been increasingly linkedto economic and social regeneration.

Such huge changes have emphasised theneed for mechanisms to validate the compe-tence of both individuals and organisations.Our members are committed to Codes ofConduct, bound by various standards andguidance and subject to processes of enforcement and discipline. As professionalbodies it is our role to regulate, promote andenforce good practice on our members, andwhile English Heritage’s role is different, ifcomplementary, we recognise that most ofour achievements have been significantly facilitated by its partnership and support.

At its most visible level, six honorary chairsof the institutes have come from EnglishHeritage, and it is the largest employer of our collective membership. In addition toconstant encouragement, English Heritage hasprovided steady financial support for projectsand funded publications, conferences and thedevelopment of good practice guidance toother non-heritage sectors. Furthermore, we continue to work with English Heritageon one of our major areas for sectoralimprovement – the development of trainingprogrammes and a vocational qualificationthat will create a more coherent career structure.

As ever, the historic environment sector is beset by the Chinese curse of living ininteresting times and it is axiomatic that overthe next years we will witness equally seismic shifts in the way in which we are

required to work. In that context, the increasing emphasis on English Heritage as a fulcrum for national policy, strategic adviceand advocacy is something that we welcome,providing it is resourced to research anddeliver the best.

IFA looks forward to continuing to workin partnership with English Heritage to create and support dynamic, effective andwell-funded private and public archaeologicalsectors, and IHBC to collaborating on a holistic approach to understanding, protectingand conserving historic places, with particularemphasis on education, training and outreach.Clearly there will be many challenges in thefuture to fully realise these goals – not leastthe establishment of sufficient and stablegovernment funding. However, reflection on the experience of the last years does notgive credence to the often-heard notion of afragmented sector with divergent interests –rather it demonstrates a fair distance travelledin a spirit of common accord. Such a spirit ofpartnership should remain the key aspect ofthe professional institutes’ relationship withEnglish Heritage.

David Jennings Chair IFAJohn Yates Chair IHBC

The universities

It remains most unusual for a state archaeolog-ical service to encompass the range of tasks wesee within the English Heritage Research &Standards Group. That range is expansive, notjust in expertise, but also in engagement. Wemay find the same group advising planningofficers in remote rural regions on the virtuesof soggy digging on one day, and submittingan article to Nature the next. That range of


Professionals workingtogether. Oxford Castleshows the full range of professional skillsneeded today for regeneration of thehistoric environment.

© O

xfor

d A

rcha

eolo

gy

engagement is one of the jewels in EnglishHeritage’s crown, and one that has fostered a most productive interaction with theuniversity sector over the last years.Looking back over those years serves to highlight what has been achieved, what needsfostering, and what opportunities lie ahead.

In , the fledgling commission inheritedfrom the Department of the Environmentsomething of a quirky gem in the form of theAncient Monuments Laboratory, a group ofable specialists applying some very innovativetechniques to the conservation and rescueexcavation of sites. The AM Lab had grown up in a world with a quite differentconception of central state responsibility forour heritage. Its successor within EnglishHeritage needed to adapt fast to a new worldof devolved responsibility, interacting with a quite different planning process and directdeveloper funding. It was absolutely criticalthat the whole community was persuaded thatheritage protection and sustenance involvedscientific analysis and cutting-edge research; it was not simply a clean-up job. Both thescientists at the core and the science advisorsin the regions have made considerable stridesin achieving that.

In the partnership between EnglishHeritage and the universities in achieving that goal, I believe both sides have benefitedimmeasurably. Many of English Heritage’sscientific staff have conducted their research

within university laboratories, and haveengaged in teaching programmes. There has been a very healthy movement ofemployment between the two sectors, with anumber of former English Heritage scientistsnow holding readerships and professorshipswithin the university sector. In turn, some of the best science used in teaching heritage-related subjects was sponsored and carried out by English Heritage.

In terms of the future, it is salutary tocompare ourselves with other state archaeological services around the world.There are some with a considerably greatervolume of sites in their charge, and some inwhich the contribution of heritage-relatedindustries to the economy is even higher thanin the UK. In many countries, the protectionof the fabric of buildings and the excavationof threatened sites proceeds in an efficientmanner. It is hard, however, to find a stateservice in which the scientific quality ofresearch and innovation rivals what we seeunder the auspices of English Heritage. That is an achievement that needs protectionand nourishment – the key for which must be continuing partnership between a strong research division and a world-classuniversity sector.

Martin Jones,George Pitt-Rivers Professor of ArchaeologicalScience, University of Cambridge



Robert Howard ofNottingham Universityuses a microscope tomeasure tree rings to date a sample ofhistoric timber.

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

During the Second Reading debate on the National Heritage Bill, the Ministersummarised the role of English Heritage as being:• to manage, maintain and present in a lively

and imaginative way the monuments in thecare of the Secretary of State;

• to make grants for the preservation ofhistoric buildings and ancient monuments;

• to co-ordinate rescue archaeology work; and• to advise the Secretary of State on listing,

scheduling and guardianship.

It is significant that the top priority was givento monuments in the care of the Secretary ofState, undoubtedly reflecting the view of thegovernment of the time that there was scopefor much more commercial presentation; thiswas also emphasised by the choice of the firstchairman, Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.Archaeology was seen solely in the context of rescue work on development sites; EnglishHeritage’s role in the management of changethrough advice on statutory consents is notmentioned at all.

Compare this with the wording used years later in Power of Place and the successordocuments produced by the Government, andthe change is dramatic. The roles identified in are still there. But they are set in thecontext of a new holistic approach that valuesthe historic environment not just for itshistoric or architectural significance, but alsofor its wider contribution to a sense of placeand to social and economic regeneration.There is also a new acceptance of the need to manage change rather than oppose it, andto recognise the right of participants to appropriate treatment and levels of service.English Heritage has contributed to this sea-change in a number of ways.

Policies for the historic environment

Two key documents were published in theearly s. Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG ), Archaeology and Planning, implemented a significant English Heritage-inspired shift from rescue excavation toarchaeological assessment and mitigationwithin the planning process. This in turn ledto a major influx of developer funding intoarchaeology, together with the reorganisationof the profession into contractors and curators.English Heritage also helped to instigate anddrafted much of the subsequent PPG ,Planning and the Historic Environment.



The View From EnglishHeritageWhere have we made a difference? Oliver Pearcey Special Project Director

Working with many partners, English Heritage is transforming the way it manages and promotes thehistoric environment.

At the turn of the 21stcentury, Power of Placeprovided a new visionof the contribution ofthe historic environmentto contemporary life. Italso demonstrated howthe public, private andvoluntary sectors needto work in partnershipto turn that vision intoreality.

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

These generic documents have since beenamplified by a range of more detailed EnglishHeritage guidance on topics ranging fromagriculture, enabling development and church alterations to retail development inthe historic environment. Quantitative and

qualitative surveys include the Heritage Counts series – an annual assessment of various indicators of the state of the historic environment – and more detailed surveys intothemes ranging from the commercial values oflisted properties to the economic return fromthe regeneration of historic areas.

Understanding the historic environment

The last years have been characterised by a shift from reactive rescue responses to more coherent management of archaeologicalinterests within the planning framework. The successful development of this approachwas aided by vital pump-priming supportfrom English Heritage that allowed countiesto build up the capacity to manage archaeological issues and to provide the information base needed through sites andmonuments records.

Proper understanding of the historic environment and its significance was furthersupported by English Heritage’s direct expenditure on commissioned archaeologicalwork, which gradually moved from the investigation of individual sites to moresynthetic assessment of whole areas underthreat, such as wetlands and the intertidalzone. The amalgamation of English Heritagewith the Royal Commission on the HistoricalMonuments of England in provided theopportunity to extend this approach, boththrough thematic surveys such as those ofSecond World War defences and Cold Warsites, and more generic work such as theNational Mapping Programme, whichemploys the resources of the NationalMonuments Record (NMR) to documentEngland’s archaeological landscapes from air photographs. All this was coupled with amajor programme of academic publicationaddressing both backlog research inherited by English Heritage and archaeological survey and historic buildings recording workcarried out since . In parallel, we havedeveloped the role of science in archaeology,for example through our work on dendrochronological dating methods.

Conserving and managing the historic environment

Although research and the management ofour own properties have tended to have ahigher public profile, conservation caseworkhas always been at the heart of EnglishHeritage’s work. Casework begins with theneed to understand the special significance of places. English Heritage got off to a goodstart with the accelerated re-survey of listedbuildings, which became fully operational in/, and the compilation of the first-everregister of historic parks and gardens, whichwas given statutory authority in . Thesewere followed by the Monuments ProtectionProgramme, which was established in to do for scheduled monuments what the re-survey was doing for buildings. Subsequentprogrammes of designation have dealt withbattlefields, maritime sites and proposals fornew world heritage sites. At the same time,the process of designation was extended intonew fields, such as the listing of post-SecondWorld War buildings and the survey ofnationally important buildings and monuments at risk.

Alongside the evaluation of individual sitesand buildings, English Heritage has developednew methods for assessing the significance of the historic environment as a whole, bothon a large scale through historic landscapecharacterisation and intensive urban study,

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: The view from English Heritage


The HistoricEnvironment LocalManagement (HELM)project provides accessible advice tolocal authorities andothers whose decisionsaffect the historic environment, in this case professional farmadvisers (see page 39).

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

and at a site level through the development of conservation statements and plans.

English Heritage’s role in statutory casework is changing from that of the reactiveadviser (the so-called ‘heritage policeman’) to the proactive enabler. Along the way wehave seen changes to our powers, particularlyfollowing our takeover in of the role of the Greater London Council’s HistoricBuildings Division, which gave us much more direct authority to intervene in historicenvironment issues in the capital. The processof self-renewal is not yet complete butincreasingly we are acting on our belief thatwe are meant to be managing change in thehistoric environment, not preventing it. The need to protect significance must bebalanced against the right of people to enjoythe benefits of change. This does not meanthat we will not fight where a fight is necessary. It does mean, however, that wewill try to be move further upstream throughearlier involvement in development proposals,by building up the capacity of our partners, by providing them with better technicaladvice, and by making our casework processesquicker and more customer friendly.

We have made similar changes to ourgrants programmes, which have moved fromreactive support of repairs to programmes thattarget elements of the historic environment atrisk. One example is the scheme for gardensintroduced after the great storms of and; another is the support for social andeconomic regeneration provided throughConservation Area Partnerships and HeritageEconomic Regeneration schemes. These andother schemes increasingly seek to meet funding needs not addressed by other grant-giving bodies, especially the Heritage LotteryFund (HLF). They are further underpinnedby our work to help raise the standards ofpractical conservation work through technicalresearch, professional and craft training, andsupport for accreditation schemes. On occasion we have also acted as a buildingpreservation trust to repair and then either sell on or keep in hand buildings which aretoo expensive or otherwise too risky for anyother private or public sector partner to takeon. Recent examples include Danson House,which has been passed on to a trust formanagement following the completion ofrepairs, and Apethorpe, which has just beenacquired compulsorily for repair and selling on.

Casework interventions are inevitablycontroversial and at times unsuccessful. Thishas been particularly true in London, whereintense development pressures have led to

major policy debates over the issue of tallbuildings as well as a number of specific causes célèbres such as the Baltic Exchange andthe Gherkin. Our resources have always beenlimited but even the much greater funds ofthe HLF have been insufficient to secure thefuture of every nationally important building at risk, and some such as BrightonWest Pier have been lost.

Enjoying the historic environment

From the very beginning English Heritagewas under an obligation to present its properties in new and exciting ways, as well assignificantly increasing the income generatedfrom them. As government support forEnglish Heritage has declined in real termsthis has become a much more significantelement in our total funding. Our membership scheme has been a huge successwith more than half a million membersalready recruited and more on the way. We have acquired a number of major newproperties such as Clun and Wigmore castles,Brodsworth, Eltham Palace, and ApsleyHouse, which will always require publicsupport to survive with their historic significance intact. At the same time, we have set up local management agreements thatallow local people and knowledge to informthe presentation and management of many of our smaller properties. We have also hugelyincreased our event programmes, from thelarge-scale Festival of History to smaller events at our individual sites.

As well as paying greater concern to theneeds of our visitors we have significantlychanged the way we treat our sites. The most significant elements of this are a lessruthless approach to conservation that allowsgreater respect for historic fabric of all ages,more emphasis on documentary research and



West Pier, Brighton. In2004, English Heritageand its partners had toacknowledge that therewas little chance ofsaving this famousGrade I pier from theravages of fire and the sea.

NM

R A

A70

/322

3 ©

Cro

wn

copy

right

.NM

R



recording, the adoption of new techniquessuch as garden archaeology, a greater understanding of monuments and buildings intheir setting and a willingness to countenancereversible non-destructive restoration ofgardens and interiors.

We are also making much greater efforts to increase understanding and enjoyment ofthe historic environment as a whole. Oureducation and outreach schemes, ranging fromBlue Plaques to site-based projects involvingspecific groups of people, are extendingappreciation of the historic environment intoexcluded communities and groups. We are publishing and disseminating more information, both through our popularpublishing programme and newer electronic

media. One example is our support forimmensely popular television programmessuch as Restoration; another our hosting ofinternet projects such as Images of England,which by its completion will havephotographed every accessible listed buildingin England, and ViewFinder, which makesimages from the NMR available for schoolsand other users. We have also worked withthe Civic Trust to put extra resources intoHeritage Open Days, increasing both thenumber of properties taking part and thenumber of people visiting them.

Conclusion

While its core responsibilities remain unaltered, English Heritage itself has changeddramatically over the last years – and hasled many equally profound changes in theheritage sector as a whole. It is clear that yet more change is inevitable, starting withHeritage Protection Reform, which will radically alter the whole statutory structure ofregulation. Amidst all of these changes, theone fixed certainty is that English Heritagewill in the future, as in the past, be unable todo its job without the support and partnershipof all those interested and involved in thehistoric environment.

Jona

than

Bai

ley

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge©

Eng

lish

Her

itage

The dining room, ElthamPalace, London.Thisremarkable combinationof medieval royal palaceand 1930s art decopleasure house wasopened to the public in 1999 following anintensive programme of conservation andrestoration.

Festival of History,Stoneleigh, August 2004.A company of amateurperformers re-enacts ascene from the EnglishCivil War.

Like that unlikely heritage hero Baldrick(Tony Robinson), English Heritage can nowsay with confidence that we ‘have a cunningplan’. Indeed a five-year plan to take us intothe future. Such plans are commonplace forlarge organisations, but for English Heritagethis presents us with some very real and toughchallenges. It will mean that we have tocontinue to work in new ways relying moreon partnership and strategic engagement,speed and flexibility, clarity and consistency of advice, commercial awareness and customer service.

The strategy is called Making the Past Part of our Future, which also describes whatEnglish Heritage’s mission is. Our aim is tocreate a heritage cycle where an increasingunderstanding of the historic environmentleads to people valuing it more and as aconsequence caring for it better. An environment cared for will be enjoyed, and enjoyment normally brings a thirst to learn more, thus completing the cycle.



Into the FutureOur strategy for 2005–2010Simon Thurley Chief Executive

21 years after its foundation, English Heritage is committed to Making the Past Part of our Future.

English Heritage exists to make the past part of our future. Our strategy is tocreate a cycle of understanding, valuing, caring and enjoying. For each part of the cycle we have adopted strategic aims.These are underpinned by a further aim – to make the most effective use of the assets in our care.

OUR STRATEGY FOR 2005–2010

BY UNDERSTANDINGthe historic environmentpeople value it

BY VALUING it, they will want to care for it

BY CARING for it they will help peopleenjoy it

FROM ENJOYINGthe historic environmentcomes a thirst to understand


For each of the elements in the cycle we have adopted high-level strategic aims. Thefirst is to help people develop their understanding of the historic environment. We regard this as an essential prerequisite to dealing with ourbuilt heritage, on the macro level as well asthe micro. English Heritage will continue tomake its own expert contribution to this, but will increasingly help others to do it for themselves. The second aim is to get thehistoric environment onto other people’s agendas.We need to foster the recognition that thehistoric environment is a cross-cutting issuethat affects many areas of policy and activity,not just a small box called heritage. Thirdlywe need to enable and promote sustainable changeto England’s historic environment. Too often inthe past conservation has been about stoppingthings from happening. We now see it as aprocess to enable change to take place thatwill give all parts of the historic environmenta sustainable future. We need to practise this ourselves and help other people to do likewise.

Our fourth aim is to help local communities to care for their historic environment. Localauthorities have the responsibility and powersto protect and enhance our national heritage.Many do it well; many also need the help andadvice of a specialist organisation like EnglishHeritage. We need to make sure our help andadvice is available, appropriate and consistent.From the fourth part of the heritage cycle,enjoying, comes our fifth aim: to stimulate and harness enthusiasm for England’s historic environment. The historic environment is oneof the nation’s favourite pastimes. We need to harness this enthusiasm for good, and stimulate it where possible amongst those who currently do not have access to it.

We also have a sixth aim, which is to makethe most effective use of the assets in our care.English Heritage has considerable assets, notonly £m a year of taxpayers’ money, butthe sites and collections which are entrustedto us, our staff and our reputation for expertise. All these we need to use efficientlyand effectively for the public good.

If I were to highlight any parts of the planin terms of specific programmes there wouldbe three that I would identify as being

particularly important. The HeritageProtection Review, which will lead to aWhite Paper in , will fundamentallychange the way protection is managed in thiscountry. The pilot projects we are currentlyrunning will inform a new system that will be fairer, faster, more transparent and closertuned to the needs of today. This system will be complemented by a suite of newconservation principles that English Heritagewill adopt later this year and will start topromote and promulgate the year after. These will make it much easier for non-specialists to understand what conservationistsare trying to bring about and easier to achieveconsistency in recommendations and decisionsacross the country. Both of these majorchanges will influence our property development programme, a five-year multimillion-pound investment programme in our sites. The sites will become exemplarsof these new ways of looking at heritage andmanaging it.

Plans and strategies need to be flexible andresponsive and over the next five years wewill be constantly reviewing progress andupdating our strategy to make sure that it isthe most effective response to the challengesfacing England’s historic environment. I amlooking forward to working with staff andcommissioners and leading English Heritagethrough the challenge of Making the Past Partof our Future.

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: Into the future


Seahenge

When the sea stripped away a bed of peat on the north Norfolk coast, at Holme-next-the Sea, it exposed more than a uniqueBronze Age timber circle. The discoverystarted a debate which has been one of the most contentious in recent British archaeology. Should the timber circle be left to its fate or excavated? Should it beconserved and displayed or reburied; treated as an archaeological object or a place ofcontemporary religious meaning? How couldthe needs of archaeology, nature conservationand public interest be reconciled?

The world’s attention was drawn to thetimber circle in January when theIndependent newspaper ran a front-page storywith the by-line ‘Shifting sands yieldStonehenge of the Sea’ accompanied by anevocative photograph of the timber circle andits remarkable upside-down oak bole risingfrom the centre. The name ‘Seahenge’instantly caught on and attracted thousands

of visitors to the relatively remote beach. Tosome local people the visitors were a financialopportunity; to others, who appreciated solitude and space, they were an unwelcomenuisance. To this mix were added neo-paganswho believed the site should be left alone. Tosome of them archaeologists were insensitive,putting science before feelings and emotions.But archaeologists saw Seahenge as a unique,vulnerable discovery, an opportunity to shednew light on prehistoric Britain.

Surveys confirmed that the sea was risingrelative to the land, causing increased erosionof the Norfolk coast. The blanket of peat,which had covered and protected theSeahenge timbers for centuries, had beenalmost completely stripped away in the pastdecade, exposing the timbers to the elementsand to wood-boring snails. The timberslooked solid but they were becoming increasingly fragile and sponge-like. EnglishHeritage, with Norfolk County Council,


Making a DifferenceCase historiesOver 21 years, English Heritage has helped the historicenvironment in many different ways.

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

Seahenge, Holme-next-the-Sea, Norfolk.In 1999 the decision tosave this extraordinaryBronze Age timbercircle from the searaised challenging issuesof principle for EnglishHeritage and the wider archaeologicalcommunity.

EH – THE FIRST 21 YEARS: Making a difference


the Norfolk Wildlife Trust and the owner ofthe site (unusually the intertidal zone for thissection of coast did not belong to the Crown)decided that the timbers should be excavatedand removed for analysis before they could bedestroyed by the sea.

As a result the neo-pagans occupied the siteand only a High Court judgment removedthem. The results clearly justified the archaeological excavation. Remarkably precisedating showed that the oak bole had been cutdown (or had fallen over) in the spring of and the outer oak timbers cut exactlya year later. The ‘finger-prints’ of bronze axeson the surfaces of the wood provided themost detailed information for the constructionof any Bronze Age monument in Europe.Subsequent surveys of the beach revealed thatthis coastal zone was rich in prehistoric andlater monuments and artefacts, whichcontinue to erode into the sea.

The ring timbers are currently beingconserved at the Mary Rose Trust inPortsmouth and the massive bole is beingprepared for freeze-drying as a single piece.Arrangements are now in place ultimately todisplay the timber circle in a new gallery atKing’s Lynn Museum.

Seahenge has taught us a lot about earlyBronze Age society and our own. Every dayrare and unusual remains of our past are disap-pearing into the sea, especially on the soft andvulnerable east coast. And local people wantto be engaged, to help, and to argue abouttheir historic environment. Nowhere hasdemonstrated the power of place more thanthese shifting sands at Holme-next-the-Sea.

David MilesArchaeological Advisor

Wigmore Castle: new approaches to conservation

Wigmore Castle in Herefordshire was one ofthe last great castles to remain in its naturalstate when it was taken into guardianship in after protracted negotiations with itsowner for more than eight years. The ruin,set in woodland pasture on a high spur,threatened imminent collapse. Indeed, a largepart of the curtain wall had fallen in andsmall collapses were a regular occurrence.

The assumption was that English Heritagewould treat the site like any other guardianship monument, stripping it of fallendebris and capping the walls to ensure theirlong-term stability, and provide a shop, toiletsand car park. The reality was that English

Heritage carried out the sort of repair that itregularly advised private owners to do, relyingon minimum intervention and paying thesame respect to the natural and historic environment to protect both the monumentand its setting. The techniques were not new,it was the scale on which they were appliedthat was remarkable.

The philosophy of repair was to leave the site as close to how it was found as wascompatible with long-term stability and public safety; to make a detailed survey of the site before and after repair, and to keepdisturbance of the site’s deep archaeologicaldeposits to a minimum. Instability was causedby tree-root disturbance, water penetration,and the local tradition of undermining wallsto bring them down. Parts of the site wereconcealed by ivy, well rooted into the walltop and starting to cause damage. However,the greater part of the ruin was stable below a naturally developed grass cap that wasproviding excellent protection. It alsoprovided a habitat for rare plants, a remarkablenatural resource. At the outset it was thoughtthat this capping would have to be taken offand reinstated – with experience it provedpossible to leave much of it undisturbed.

The first phase of conservation was a trialarea on the curtain wall that established methods of recording and repair, enabling the production of a specification for thewhole repair contract at a time when it was impossible to get close to the problemareas across the site. Delivery of the projectdepended on the project team’s ability to take decisions quickly and consistently. It also required a contractor who was willing to adapt to unfamiliar repair techniques.

Public presentation was low key, preservingthe special nature of the site. The bulk of itwas provided in the village where existing car parks were used. Effectively, this gaveback the castle to the local community, andprovided a boost to the local economy. Onthe site, it is the management of the natural

Wigmore Castle.The south tower nearing the end of itsrepair, with its softcapping replaced andsome new masonryintroduced tostrengthen the structure.

Gly

n C

oppa

ck ©

Eng

lish

Her

itage



ground cover that directs the visitor, notfences or barriers. Steps to the higher areaswere constructed in existing erosion scars, and you have to look very hard ten years on to see that the site has been substantiallyrepaired. It is still a site where a real sense of discovery is possible.

Glyn CoppackPlanning and Development

Acton Court

Situated near the village of Iron Acton, northof Bristol, this remarkable survival of theRenaissance in England has seen many vicissitudes since it was built for a visit ofHenry VIII and Ann Boleyn.

The first known house was built in the th century, though the site itself is olderstill. In the ownership of the Poyntz familyfrom , it was of only local significanceuntil the last quarter of the th century,when Sir Robert Poyntz became a successfulcourtier. His grandson, Sir Nicholas Poyntz,built the east range of the surviving house toaccommodate a progress of Henry VIII in. It was designed in the very latest stylearchitecturally and decorated and furnished toa royal standard. The wallpaintings are of a quality unparalleled in any surviving th-

century house in England. Until his death in, Sir Nicholas rebuilt the remainder ofthe house in an outwardly regular courtyardform with symmetrical elevations incorporating classical architectural detail.

The subsequent history is one of gradualdecline. In the estate was split up andsold. Acton Court was greatly reduced in size and converted to a farmhouse.

After slumbering quietly in its rural settingfor over years, interrupted only by theoccasional attentions of scholars, Acton Courtsprang to prominence again in , whenthe ‘Acton Court estate’ was offered for sale.The associated farmland and part of the buildings were sold to a local farmer; theBristol Visual and Environmental BuildingsTrust bought the house itself, by then in verypoor condition and at risk of collapse, to tryand secure its preservation. The huge costs ofdoing so, and the lack of viability of the houseas a single dwelling without its surroundingland, led to the initial involvement of EnglishHeritage both as a statutory adviser on listedbuilding consent and as a possible grant giver.

English Heritage rapidly realised the uniqueimportance of the house, and the significanceof the associated gardens and earthworks.After urgent scheduling of the house and itsenvirons in , English Heritage resolved toacquire, repair and sell on Acton Court as a

Acton Court.The vyseand internal courtyardlooking north east afterrestoration.

Nig

el C

orrie

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge



revolving project. This was a radical newdeparture for the organisation, but recognisedthe scale of expenditure needed on survey and repair, and the importance of avoidingenabling development which would havebeen very damaging to the house and itssetting.

It took a further years to acquire theremaining parts of the historic site previouslysold off, to carry out the archaeological investigation of the site and the recording ofthe standing buildings, and to complete therepair of the house. The sale secured publicaccess and the house and its grounds are nowopened on a pleasant low-key basis by thenew owner.

Oliver PearceyProject Manager –

Rodwell, Kirsty and Bell, Robert . Acton Court:TheEvolution of an Early Tudor Courtier’s House. London:English Heritage

Brodsworth Hall

Brodsworth Hall, near Doncaster, was built by the Thellusson family between and in the grounds of their previous house.It was built in an italianate style to the designsof a little-known London architect, PhilipWilkinson, and furnished opulently byLapworths of London. The house remained inthe ownership of the family until it was givento English Heritage in , while its contents

were purchased for us by the NationalHeritage Memorial Fund. The house andgarden were opened to the public in after the necessary conservation work and the provision of visitor facilities.

The house was acquired because it was an exceptional and little-altered survival of a Victorian country house with most of itscontents and original decoration. Its valuescould not be expected to survive any form of adaptive re-use. The house had seen fewstructural alterations since its constructionalthough each generation had left its mark onthe interiors, and the servants wing had falleninto disrepair in the th century. Becauselittle maintenance had been carried out formany decades – one of the reasons for theunusual degree of survival – the contents and decoration of the house were extremelyfragile.

The appropriate treatment for this so-calledtime capsule was a matter of vigorous debateboth inside and outside English Heritage.Should we conserve the house as far as possible as we found it, with minimum intervention, or should we go for a full-blooded restoration of its Victorian grandeur?During this debate, the house, its contents andits grounds were extensively documented asthe basis for the fullest possible understandingof its values, which is the essential underpinning to effective conservation.

This work supported the eventual decisionto do as little as possible to the main part ofthe house since it revealed the interest of howthe house had been used by the Thellussonfamily from its completion onwards. It wasalso decided to put many of the visitor facilities into the servants wing to avoid intrusion into the landscape.

Even a programme of minimal intervention took several years. After initialdocumentation, the contents were treated forinsect infestation and removed to storage orfor stabilisation. In the house, the roof wasrenewed, decayed stonework replaced, newservices (including environmental control)provided and other parts of the structure, such as the windows, refurbished so that theyworked. The decoration of the house wasgently cleaned to remove the accumulation of surface dirt from years of coal fires.

The gardens of Brodsworth are also ofconsiderable significance both as a Victorianadaptation of the grounds of the previoushouse and because they made skilful use of anold quarry. Here, the same approach was notpossible, since plants and trees cannot be keptin stasis and their growth had obscured the

West Hall, BrodsworthHall,Yorkshire. In 1990 a partnership betweenEnglish Heritage and the National HeritageMemorial Fund allowedthis remarkable timecapsule of a Victoriancountry house and itscontents to be saved for the nation.

John

Crit

chle

y ©

Eng

lish

Her

itage


historic design of the gardens. They havetherefore been restored as far as possible totheir appearance at the last period of fullmaintenance.

The approach to the conservation ofBrodsworth was distinctive, though buildingon the same respect for the whole history ofthe house and the values of the original fabricas practised by the National Trust at CalkeAbbey. The success of this approach owesmuch to the skill, dedication and team-working of the English Heritage staff, consultants and contractors who worked onthis project. The house and gardens as theyare now are much enjoyed by the public,while remaining true to their historic valueswhich we tried to protect and preserve.

Christopher YoungRegional Director, Historic Properties,North Region –

The post-war listing programme

In there were no listed post-SecondWorld War buildings in England; now thereare well over ranging from CliftonCathedral to pre-fabs in Birmingham(Harwood ). Once considered highlycontentious, listing post-war buildings nowseldom raises an eyebrow. In , MORIfound that per cent of people felt it wasimportant to protect England’s best modernarchitecture, a figure that rose to an astonishing per cent among those agedbetween and . How did we get there?

English Heritage’s post-war listingprogramme had a lot to do with it. A little‘pre-history’ is in order. It is now difficult tobelieve that buildings as spectacular as thes art deco Firestone Factory on London’sGreat West Road could be demolished quitelegally over a bank holiday weekend asrecently as . Public outrage led to agovernment re-think and a number of mainlyModernist inter-war buildings were listed. Itwas logical to extend the principle to post-warbuildings, especially since some buildings ofthe s and s – exciting years forBritish architecture – were coming up forrefurbishment and the future of others lookedbleak. Although it had been possible to listpost-war buildings since , it took somehigh-level canvassing of ministers who wereprepared to listen before the process was puton a secure and funded footing: the post-warlisting programme was born in . Threefactors mark the programme out from earlierlisting exercises. First, it was based on

systematic and rigorous research. Secondly,the whole exercise was overseen by an independent panel of experts (chaired first by Ron Brunskill, later by Bridget Cherry).Thirdly, recommendations for listing becamesubject to public consultation for the first time ever.

The decision to open up this part of thelisting process to public consultation waswarmly supported by English Heritage.Recommendations were put forward on thebasis of published research and selection criteria. It was more than just a proceduralreform: it was a major step towards dispellingthe mystique that surrounded listing, the ideathat only experts knew best and no otherstakeholders were involved. In many respects,the post-war listing programme (and the principle was quickly extended to other listingprogrammes) was something of a prototypefor the current Heritage Protection Reform,testing the impact and effectiveness of greateropenness.

Consultation took a number of forms: exhibitions across the country, meeting peopleface to face in the buildings themselves, especially the big public housing schemes such as Park Hill in Sheffield, and, mostimportantly, engaging the media and therebycreating public interest that proved to be highand sustained. It was a two-way process. It subjected expert views to public scrutinybut also helped the public find a voice toshow it cared.

During the course of the post-war listingprogramme it became increasingly clear thatthe listing legislation did not always helpachieve the most appropriate outcomes for the buildings. Complex buildings demandedbespoke solutions. Many sat within designedsettings of equal importance. It was difficult,sometimes, to assess historic complexes holistically because the various componentswere liable to be subject to different designation regimes. Major changes in officialthinking about listing developed at this time,including the idea of management guidelinesand conservation plans. These in turn havefed in to the principles underpinning thecurrent Heritage Protection Reform. But,above all, the programme helped ensure thatthe best of England’s modern heritage canstand safely alongside the best of the very old.

Martin CherryDirector of Research

Harwood, Elain . England:A Guide to Post-war ListedBuildings. London: Batsford



Twenty-one years conserving parks,gardens and designed landscapes

Dame Jennifer Jenkins as chair of the HistoricBuildings Council (HBC) was instrumental in ensuring that the legislation that formedEnglish Heritage in enabled the newauthority to compile ‘a register of gardens and other land which appears to be of specialhistoric significance’. The Town andCountry Planning Act gave statutory weightto policies for the conservation of historicparks and gardens and in , theDepartment of Environment introduced in the General Development OrderConsolidation, a statutory duty on planningauthorities to consult Garden History Societyon applications affecting sites on the registerand English Heritage on registered Grade Iand II* sites.

Initially, entries in Register of Parks andGardens of Special Historic Interest weremade on the recommendation of a sub-committee of the HBC established by DameJennifer, with descriptions based on publishedsources compiled by Dr Christopher Thacker.The first lists consisted of , gardens andlandscapes categorised in the same way aslisted buildings – Grade I, Grade II* andGrade II. Dr David Jacques was subsequentlyemployed in to review the register andproduce a complete set of boundary maps; bythe end of a further sites had beenadded. It was a remarkable achievement, butthe limited resources available for researchinto individual entries inevitably attracted criticism, while sites that had remained unnoticed in print also tended to escape the

register. In work began on its completerevision, led by Dr Harriet Jordan with asmall team of dedicated inspectors and support staff making site visits and studyingunpublished primary material before redraftingmuch-enlarged register entries – typically up from a half-page to four or five pages. This summer will see the new register – nowcontaining , sites including Victoriantown parks and cemeteries as well as landscapeparks, allotments and town squares – launchedon the web as an element of the newHeritage Protection regime.

The first garden grants were made as aresult of the great storms of October and January , and catapulted gardengrants and management plans into the mainstream as a condition of grant. TheGovernment-funded joint English Heritageand Countryside Commission (Task ForceTrees) grant programme was set up to helpowners repair the many historic parks andgardens devastated by the storm. The percent grants offered for the cost of preparingrestoration plans demonstrated the importanceattached to them. As expressed in EnglishHeritage’s review of the grant programme years later, ‘the opportunity to prepareplans expanded both knowledge of landscapedesign history and the capacity to tackleconservation problems’ (English Heritage). In total some £ million was spent on clearance, ground preparation, replanting,and restoration as well as repairs to gardenbuildings and structures. More than locations participated ranging from medievaldeer parks to th-century gardens, includinglandscape parks, woodlands, pleasure grounds

Gas Council ResearchBuilding, Killingworth, byRyder & Yates, 1966–8.Playful treatment of theroof ventilators makesthe point that muchpost-war architecturewas meant to be fun.

Elai

n H

arw

ood

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge


and public parks. In all two thirds of registered sites in the storm-damaged countiesbenefited.

The edition of Heritage Counts(English Heritage ) identified that almosthalf of Grade I sites had been subject to someform of planning permission. This demon-strates that historic parks and gardens continueto be under pressure from change in both theurban and rural environments, and continualeffort will be needed to ensure their survivalfor a further years.

John WatkinsHead of Gardens and Landscape,Conservation DepartmentPaul StamperHeritage Protection Adviser

English Heritage . After the Storms.The Achievements ofthe English Heritage Grant Schemes for Storm Damage Repairin Historic Parks and Gardens. London: English HeritageEnglish Heritage . Heritage Counts.The State ofEngland’s Historic Environment. London: English Heritage

Cathedrals grant scheme

In , a Parliamentary Select Committeeheard evidence on the growing difficultiesfaced by England’s cathedrals in maintainingtheir fabric in good condition; too little hadbeen done since the Second World War andfabric appeals were not raising enough on aregular basis to keep up with necessary repairneeds. The November White Paper,This Common Inheritance, announced a newgrants scheme and from to ,Government gave English Heritage an extra£. million (later increased to £.million for the period –) to fund theCathedral Repair Grants programme. Since

then, the scheme has formed part of ourgrants programme and so far, £. millionhas been offered for repairs to Church ofEngland and Roman Catholic cathedrals,including St George’s Chapel Windsor.

When grants for places of worship had been introduced in , cathedrals excludedthemselves, as they recognised the greaterneed was in the parishes. In , EnglishHeritage commissioned Harry Fairhurst tovisit all the English cathedrals to establish theirfabric needs and the resources available. Hisreport in – the most comprehensivesince the s – established that £.million needed to be spent over the next years on major repairs, but a further £million was needed to create proper facilitiesfor staff and visitors, for fire detection andadequate fabric records and to moderniselighting and sound systems. His second surveyin demonstrated that per cent ofthose repairs had been completed and many of the new facilities (that were not eligible forour grants) had also been created. Of course,like any other large historic building, workscontinue to be needed – Church of Englandcathedrals spent £ million on repairs in, including £ million in grants fromEnglish Heritage – but the serious backlog of major repairs had been eliminated.

The range of repairs achieved reflects thewide nature of English Heritage’s work. Most grants have been spent on renewing the traditional materials of stone and lead, sosupporting the craftsmen who continue thesetrades (in commercial firms as well as the cathedral yards). Many specialist repairs havebeen funded, including work at LiverpoolMetropolitan and Coventry that used modernmaterials like GRP and copper. A researchprogramme into topics such as underside lead

Castle Hill, Devon.In the 18th century a garden vista wasdesigned to terminateto the north in a shamcastle. In the 19thcentury trees grew upto obscure the view.Many were lost in the 1990 storm andunder restoration a bolddecision was made tore-open the vista to the sham castle, as seen here.

Jere

my

Rich

ard

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge



corrosion and the conservation of Purbeckmarble has provided essential base informationfor many projects. Cutting-edge survey andrecording techniques have been applied toconservation work at Peterborough andSalisbury. The lessons learnt have a very wideapplication beyond cathedrals, which continueto be at the forefront of historic buildingwork in England.

Richard Halsey Places of Worship Strategy, Implementation Manager

ViewFinder : online access to the NMR collection

The National Monuments Record (NMR)holds a major national collection of millionarchive items, mostly photographs, relating tothe historic environment. Online access is part of the NMR’s strategy for developing itsaudiences and it has begun to make thisimportant material available via the internet.Making its services, databases, catalogues andhistoric photographs available online, suitablypackaged and promoted, is helping the NMRto reach new and broader audiences.

ViewFinder takes its place within thisapproach. In , with the help of a grant

from the Big Lottery Fund, the NMRlaunched an online browsable photographlibrary named ViewFinder, which can be foundat www.english-heritage.org.uk/viewfinder.This contains over , photographs, with a plan to add up to , more annually forthe next three years. Although this is only asmall sample of the archive photographs heldat the NMR, images already cover the wholeof England and range in date from the sto the present day.

ViewFinder is designed for the non-specialist, for lifelong learners and peopleinterested in their local area. At the sametime, the archive materials it presents are ofdirect interest to heritage professionals andacademics.

Historic photographs are an invaluablesource of evidence for the historic environ-ment, and can provide both a record ofchange and a sense of place. The sequencebelow on ViewFinder shows the junction of

6 May 1863. Junction ofMarket Street andBradshawgate, Leigh,Greater Manchester, theday before the demoli-tion of the Old Smithy.

c. 1890. Junction ofMarket Street andBradshawgate, Leigh,Greater Manchester.

9 April 1987. Junction ofMarket Street andBradshawgate, Leigh,Greater Manchester.

Wakefield Cathedral.The first grant in 1991supported repairs tothe west tower parapet and furthergrants enabledmasonry repairs to becontinued on the nave.

For further information about theNMR contact Enquiry & ResearchServices, English Heritage, KembleDrive, Swindon ;tel: ;email: [email protected]

BB94

/075

38 R

epro

duce

d by

per

miss

ion

of E

nglis

h H

erita

ge.N

MR

BB94

/075

40 R

epro

duce

d by

per

miss

ion

of E

nglis

h H

erita

ge.N

MR

BB91

/075

39 ©

Cro

wn

copy

right

.NM

R

© R

icha

rd H

alse

y



Market Street and Bradshawgate, Leigh(Greater Manchester), at different dates. The first was taken on May , the daybefore the Old Smithy was demolished. The next image shows an off-licence and theNS&L Railway parcels office on the site ofthe smithy. The auctioneer and appraiser’soffice next door still survives, though it hasbeen remodelled. In the s the corner was redeveloped as a row of shops withoffices above.

The excitement of a family historian in theUSA sums up the potential of ViewFinder: ‘I was looking for information on Saltaire. Mygreat-great grandparents, great grandparentsand most of their children worked there atSalts Mill. ViewFinder let me see somethingthat I probably never will be able to see inperson.’

Andrew SargentSpecial Projects Officer, NMR

Outreach

In , English Heritage created an Outreachteam to actively engage new audiences withthe historic environment. During the first yearof activity, the team developed projectsinvolving , new audiences, includingyoung people, ethnic communities, low-income families, and people with disabilities.Each project was developed in partnershipwith others, including local authorities, regen-eration agencies and regional museums. Aswell as helping us to reach more people, thesepartnerships also brought in £, fundingduring the first year.

Projects included engaging local communi-ties in the Housing Market Renewal processin Oldham through an arts project; enhancingaccess for different cultural communities atWitley Court; developing education andoutreach activities to support a communityarchaeology dig at Groundwell Ridge,Swindon; and revealing the hidden history ofTide Mills, Newhaven, by working withyoung offenders.

The team is also responsible for broadeningparticipation in Heritage Open Days. Toachieve this, they have developed a series ofprojects in each region aimed at opening updifferent types of buildings and encouraging agreater range of activities. Thanks to theirwork, new organisers took part over theHeritage Open Days weekend in , andthe number of non-Christian faith buildingsthat opened their doors increased tenfold.

Let us now look in more detail at one of

the first projects to be completed in /.As part of the regeneration of the South Quayin Great Yarmouth, Sarah James, the East of England Outreach Officer, worked in partnership with Great Yarmouth BoroughCouncil and Seachange, a local communityarts organisation, to re-landscape an area ofderelict land between two English Heritageproperties – Row and the Old MerchantsHouse – to create a community heritagegarden.

The project focused on the regeneration of an urban space through the arts and thedevelopment of a meaningful relationshipwith the local community from the neighbouring Middlegate Estate. Local residents were consulted throughout thescheme on the design of the garden, throughthe Residents Association and public meetings.The garden was soft-landscaped by offendersworking on Community Punishment, andsite-specific public art and street furnitureinspired by the seafaring history of the areawere created by the local Youth OffendingTeam. Over local residents and familiesattended the launch in June, planting fruittrees around the garden, herb borders and a central spiral.

The regeneration of Great Yarmouth

South Quay, GreatYarmouth. A local resident waters thesunflowers just after the public launch of the Middlegate Garden.

For more information on EnglishHeritage’s outreach work, visitwww.english-heritage.org.uk/educationor contact the Education, Events andOutreach Department on .

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge



through arts and heritage is accelerating andEnglish Heritage is an integral part of this,enjoying the full support and confidence ofmany different local partners. Recently, theSelect Committee on the Office of theDeputy Prime Minister visited the site as anexemplary case study during its review of therole of heritage in regeneration. A heritageyouth club has been established at EnglishHeritage’s Row Houses to sustain the value ofthe project, maintain the garden, and continueto inspire and work with local young people.

Tracy BormanEducation and Outreach Director

The Albert Memorial

The Albert Memorial was declared a Buildingat Risk in . At the end of the yearEnglish Heritage offered £. million, laterincreased to £. million, towards its repairand conservation, provided the thenDepartment of National Heritage met themajority of the £. million forecast cost.The Albert Memorial Trust was establishedunder the chairmanship of Sir Jocelyn Stevensto raise the shortfall.

English Heritage took responsibility for theproject on July with the intention ofcompleting the work within five years. In theevent, work was completed in October at a cost of £. million, per cent ofbudget.

The task was of unparalleled philosophicaland technical complexity, because of the widevariety of materials and methods used in theoriginal construction and required for itsrepair. Full restoration was neither technicallypractical nor realistically affordable.

The objective was not just to preserve the integrity of the fabric for a -year returnperiod and to facilitate maintenance meanwhile, but to retain and enhance itsaesthetic integrity. A further objective was to recover the legibility of the iconographicprogramme so that the meaning of thememorial was clear to visitors.

The conservation work was a synthesis oftraditional and modern techniques. The ironstructure was cleaned of corrosion using amethod used for nuclear installations, but thenprotected with several coats of red lead paint,as it had been originally.

Pulse laser cleaning was used for the firsttime on a building in England, initially on the glass ‘jewels’. This also revealed the extensive survival of the original gilding onthe ornamental leadwork, which could thenbe cleaned without damage and consolidated.This in turn allowed consistency of treatmentwith the gilding on the stonework, crucial tomaintaining the architectural balance of thememorial.

The re-gilded statue of the Prince Consortwas unveiled by Her Majesty the Queen on

The bust of the re-gilded statue of thePrince Consort.

The Albert Memorial repaired and conserved.

Nig

el C

orrie

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

Jere

my

Rich

ards

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge



October . The project won awardsfrom Europa Nostra, the Civic Trust and theRoyal Institute of Chartered Surveyors. Thenew floodlighting scheme won three moreawards in its own right and the speciallyconstructed exhibition centre on the site,which attracted , visitors, won an NPI National Heritage Award. More importantly, the Albert Memorial was restoredto its rightful position as one of the chiefornaments of the national capital.

Alasdair GlassSenior Project Director

Conservation-led regeneration in Nelson

The familiar grid pattern formed by thehumble terraced house still dominates thelandscape of many northern towns. While the traditional industrial base has largely disap-peared, the energy and spirit of the industrialrevolution remains locked within its buildings,defining local distinctiveness and character.

Whitefield contains the earliest and best-preserved townscape in Nelson,Lancashire, and represents a virtually intactth-century textile settlement, complete withworkers’ housing, mill, church and school.The multiracial community of Whitefield live in one of the most deprived wards in thecountry and fall within the government’sHousing Pathfinder Programme, designed toaddress the symptoms of housing market failure (see Conservation Bulletin , ).

In January and February EnglishHeritage supported the residents of Whitefieldas principal witness in a lengthy publicinquiry, relating to a first phase ofCompulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs). PendleBorough Council had failed to recognise thepotential of a conservation-led approach toregenerating the area, instead opting for selective demolition and new development.

The public inquiry also demonstrated that the views of the community had not beenfully understood. The inquiry reopened inFebruary to consider further evidencerelating to the collapse of the local housingmarket. In September the Deputy PrimeMinister decided not to confirm the CPOs,concluding that the best interests of community cohesion would be served by an approach which took advantage of thedistinctive Victorian townscape.

Since the public inquiry, a constructivemulti-agency partnership has been formedbased upon understanding and mutualsupport. In November following a visitby the Prince of Wales, the Prince’sFoundation facilitated a week-long ‘Inquiryby Design’. The outcome is a report offeringa physical plan and regeneration strategysupported by all sides. The plan envisages the combination of adjoining homes to makelarger ones, group repair and some new canal-side residences. The mill and weavingsheds would be converted into business unitsand loft apartments, while the church wouldprovide offices and community facilities.

Pendle Council has designated a conservation area covering the whole settlement. Housing group repairs are under way and confidence in the neighbourhood is growing. Many of thosewho had left the area are planning to returnto family and friends. The embodied energyof Whitefield and its community is beginningto be unlocked. The process of positiveregeneration provides a model for otherpathfinder authorities working in areas ofhistoric, architectural or townscape interest.

Darren RatcliffeHistoric Areas Adviser, North West and Yorkshire Regions

Nelson, Lancashire.Viewof Whitefield ward,showing housing repairwork under way in thecontext of the widerlandscape. Pendle Hill isvisible in the distance.

An English Heritage position statemententitled ‘Low Demand Housing and theHistoric Environment’ is available fromEnglish Heritage Customer ServicesDepartment, tel or email:[email protected]

© B

orou

gh o

f Pen

dle


Streets for All

English Heritage has published eight regionalStreets for All manuals, which should by nowhave been distributed to relevant staff in localauthorities and elsewhere. The manuals areaimed at all those involved in managing,designing and conserving the public realm,including councillors, highway engineers,landscape and urban designers, town planningand conservation staff, amenity societies,contractors and utility companies. Streets for Allhas been endorsed by the Department forTransport, demonstrating that all the proposalsare possible within existing legislation.

By focusing on good and bad practice in each region, the manuals emphasise theimportance of taking account of local distinctiveness and avoiding standardised solutions. Areas of advice include groundsurfaces, street furniture and traffic management. The launch of the manuals will be followed up by events in each region,either workshops or informal visits to localauthorities to discuss the principles of Streetsfor All and how to take them forward.

If you would like a copy of the Streets forAll manual for your region, please contactyour EH regional office or [email protected]

Farming the Historic Landscape

English Heritage has recently published aseries of leaflets, Farming the Historic Landscape,which provide guidance on best practice inmanaging farmland heritage. The guidance has been produced in partnership with Defra,the Association of Local GovernmentArchaeological Officers and the Farming andWildlife Advisory Group, with additionalcontributions from Oxford Archaeology, TheGarden History Society and the Association of Gardens Trusts. Separate leaflets have beenpublished which deal with historic farm buildings, parkland, archaeological sites and

the implications of environmental stewardship,together with a booklet providing a generalintroduction to the historic environmentaimed at professional farm advisers.

Copies of the publications are availablefrom English Heritage Customer Services on or by [email protected]. They are also available in PDF format fromwww.english-heritage.org.uk/farmadvice and the Historic Environment – LocalManagement website www.helm.org.uk

News from English Heritage

In conjunction with the Department of Transport, EnglishHeritage has published a suite of eight regional guides tohelp make our streets safer and more attractive places for everyone.

© E

nglis

h H

erita

ge

The home page of theImages of England‘Learning Zone’ website.

The National Monuments Record (NMR)is the public archive of English Heritage. It includes over million archive items(photographs, drawings, reports and digitaldata) relating to England’s historic environment. The following informationgives details of web resources, new collections(catalogues are available in the NMR searchroom in Swindon) and outreach programmes.Contact the NMR at: NMR Enquiry & Research Services, National Monuments Record, Kemble Drive,Swindon ; tel: ; fax: ; email: [email protected]; web www.english-heritage.org.uk/nmr

Images of England

The Images of England project is a ground-breaking initiative funded jointly by EnglishHeritage and the Heritage Lottery Fund. Itsaim is to create a point-in-time photographicrecord of England’s , listed buildings.The number of photographs featured on theImages of England website continues to grow;more than , images are currentlyincluded with more being added regularly.The website also now has a new look makingit more user friendly and improving the functionality of the site.

The Images of England ‘Learning Zone’,launched at the Education Show at theNational Exhibition Centre in March,provides content designed especially for teachers. Case studies and image albums allhelp to apply the fabulous resource of Imagesof England to the National Curriculum, bringing England’s built heritage alive for thenext generation. The Learning Zone can beaccessed atwww.imagesofengland.org.uk/education. For more information on the project pleasevisit the website or email [email protected]

From nuclear bunkers to law courts

The NMR holds material generated by majorsurvey projects undertaken by EnglishHeritage and the former Royal Commissionon the Historical Monuments of England(RCHME). This archive is wide ranging andincludes photographs of historically significantbuildings and archaeological and architecturalinvestigation reports.

In the last months, the archive of amajor project to study the buildings of theBirmingham Jewellery Quarter, and the -year research project on the vast range ofsites, monuments and installations from theCold War, have both been catalogued. Othersurvey archives catalogued recently includeThe Law Courts of England, a project initiated by the former RCHME that documented the way in which the form andfunction of law courts have developed from to the present day, and the photographicarchives from the recent Buildings of Englandpublications covering Bath, Birmingham and Bristol.

In addition to reports from archaeologicalsurvey staff, transcriptions from the archaeological analysis of aerial photographscreated as part of the National Mapping


The National MonumentsRecordNews and events

Programme are also catalogued. Recent examples include Lower Wharfedale,Yorkshire, and the Till-Tweed project,Northumberland. For further informationcontact Phil Daniels on oremail [email protected]

NMR outreach

A varied programme of workshops, tours,lectures, weekly classes and events is designedto help participants make the best use ofNMR resources for work, research or personal interest. Short introductory tours to the NMR Centre are available, and forthose wishing to explore the resources inmore detail, study days are organised on anumber of different themes.

Study days

NMR resources for local historyWe will work with you on a case study toillustrate our key records for local history.

Thursday September

NMR resources for archaeological desk-based assessmentsEvaluate a site of proposed development usingair photographs, archaeological data andsurveys from the NMR. This course will be of interest to heritage professionals andanyone seeking to use the NMR to assess the archaeology of their local area.

Thursday October

Time: all workshops start at . and finishby ..Cost: £ including a sandwich lunch.

For further information, please contact Jane Golding: tel ; email [email protected]


This craftsman at F Marson & Son,Spencer Street,Birmingham, uses techniques that havechanged little in twocenturies. He solders apiece of jewellery with a blowpipe andBirmingham sidelight.

The highly theatricalSwiss Cottage inCremorne Gardens,Chelsea, London.Thegardens were opened in the 1840s but closedin 1877; the photographis one of 3,700 recentlyadded to the ViewFinderwebsite. Photographer:York & Son, 1870–7.

AA

0033

71 /

Pet

er W

illiam

s ©

Eng

lish

Her

itage

.NM

R

CC

97/0

1023

Rep

rodu

ced

by p

erm

issio

n of

Eng

lish

Her

itage

.NM

R

At the very end of a new piece oflegislation slipped, apparently unnoticed bythe world at large, onto the statute books.The Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences)Act introduces a new offence of ‘dishonestly dealing with a “tainted” culturalobject knowing or believing it to be tainted’.A ‘cultural object’ is ‘an object of cultural,architectural or archaeological interest’. Such an object is ‘tainted’ if it was removedunlawfully after December . Thiswould cover:

• objects which are either fixtures or objectsforming part of the land and in the curtilageof a listed building removed without listedbuilding consent

• objects found using a metal detector andremoved from a protected place under theAncient Monuments and ArchaeologicalAreas Act .

The maximum penalties for the offence are:

• on summary conviction months prisonand/or £, fine

• on conviction on indictment years prisonand/or unlimited fine.

The implications for architectural theft

Architectural theft is an increasing problemand this Act should provide a useful additionalweapon in the armoury of those seeking toprevent it. In particular, it allows dealers incultural objects to be targeted and provides for penalties that certainly ought to provide a deterrent to anyone tempted to handle such objects!

However, the Act seems to have been littleused in its first months of operation withno reported cases I have been able to identify.(If any readers have experience of bringingcases under the Act I would be veryinterested to hear from them.)

But there are things local authorities and

others can do short of prosecution whichmight act as a deterrent. For example, it seemsto me that local authorities could usefullyprepare and circulate to potential dealers listsof tainted items known to have been removedfrom listed buildings in their area. Shouldsuch an object then be offered to the dealer,hopefully the dealer will refuse to handle itgiven that he is fixed with notice that it istainted. Perhaps a national list could be organised?

I’m sure practitioners will want to makebest use of the opportunity the Act presents to reduce architectural theft.

Nigel HewitsonLegal [email protected]


Legal DevelopmentsDealing in Cultural Objects(Offences) Act 2003

A vandalised fireplace inBrunswick House, a late18th-century Grade II*Building at Risk inLambeth, London SW8,which is now in theprocess of rescue andrepair.

© L

ambe

th B

orou

gh C

ounc

il

Collins Period Houseby Albert Jackson and David Day

In Britain period property is everywhere, andpeople are increasingly trying to restore andrevive the intricate features of their periodhomes. The revised edition of the best-sellingCollins Period House is the ultimate homeowner’s guide to the styles and featuresof residential property built between the mid-th century and the outbreak of theSecond World War.

Published in association with EnglishHeritage, Collins Period House is an invaluableguide to appreciative restoration and design,aimed at anyone wanting to know moreabout the architecture, structure and design of their property as well as those who want to undertake cost-effective restoration. Key features include an introduction on thedefinition of the period concerned; figures for cost-effective restoration in ; thatchedroofs and energy conservation; and newsections on pre-Georgian style.Publication date: August PRICE £20.00 + £2.50 P&PISBN 0 00 719275 4 / PRODUCT CODE 50958Hardback, 240 pages

Liquid Assetsby Janet Smith, with a foreword by Tracey Emin

In Liquid Assets, the third book in the muchtalked-about Played in Britain series, journalistJanet Smith, herself a keen swimmer, tracesthe development of Britain’s surprisingly richstock of lidos, starting with their muddybeginnings in London’s parks, through theirfashionable heyday in the s, to their battlefor survival today.

Lavishly illustrated with archive andcontemporary photographs, Liquid Assets highlights some of the nation’s outstandingarchitectural examples. But if lidos were onceto be found in virtually every town and city,since many have been closed, oftendespite the efforts of thousands of vociferouscampaigners. Liquid Assets charts the best ofthese lost lidos and provides a unique listingof all lidos still open in Britain, with detailedcase studies of the most impressive.PRICE £14.99 + £2.50 P&PISBN 0 9547445 00 / PRODUCT CODE 51093Hardback, 128 pages


New Publicationsfrom English Heritage

The English Seasideby Peter Williams

There is something about the seaside thatbrings out the beating heart of John Bull inthe English: doggedly erecting our windbreaksto capture every vestige of a watery sun;wrestling with deckchairs; wrapping upagainst the determined wind on the verandasof our beach huts; accepting that ‘sand’ in our‘sandwiches’ means just that!

And this is all reflected in the architectureof the seaside, as captured so evocatively inPeter Williams’s photographs: brightly decorated beach huts, elaborate promenadebenches, strange s’ shelters, the façades of ice-cream parlours… There is somethingabout all these buildings and details that tellsyou exactly where you are, that you couldn’tbe anywhere other than at one of England’smyriad seaside resorts!

Stuffed with hundreds of colour photo-graphs, this wonderful book is a perfectcelebration of the spirit of the English seaside.PRICE £14.99 + £2.50 P&PISBN 1 85074 9396 00 / PRODUCT CODE 51096Hardback, 142 pages

Seaside Holidays in the Pastby Allan Brodie,Andrew Sargent and Gary Winter

This stunning photography book captures thespirit of the now almost-lost tradition of theEnglish seaside holiday. The photographs –taken from English Heritage’s unique collection held in the National MonumentsRecord – illustrate how we used to take oursummer holidays before cheap flights andpackage deals made foreign holidays affordableto all, leading to the decline of the Englishseaside resort.

From Victorian bathers to s’ beach huts, from th-century fishermen to long-destroyed landmarks such as New Brighton’sTower, and from Punch and Judy shows todonkey rides along the beach, this bookreminds us how we have changed as a nationand, in some cases, what we have lost forever.PRICE £17.99 + £2.50 P&PISBN 1 85074 931 0 / PRODUCT CODE 51060Hardback, 184 pages


Publications may be ordered fromEnglish Heritage Postal Sales,c/o Gillards,Trident Works, MarchLane,Temple Cloud, Bristol ;tel: ; fax: ;email: [email protected] make all cheques payable in sterling to English Heritage.Publications may also be ordered fromwww.english-heritage.org.uk

ISSN –Conservation Bulletin appears three times a year. It is printed onpaper made from chlorine-free pulp sourced from sustainablemanaged forestsProduct Code: Subscription enquiries: tel ; [email protected] copies: [email protected] editor: Oliver PearceyEditorial and project management: Whimster Associates Ltd;tel: ; email: [email protected] design: Boag Associates LtdLayout: Libanus Press LtdProduction: Hawthornes LtdWeb version: www.english-heritage.org.uk© English Heritage English Heritage is the Government’s lead body for thehistoric environment.English Heritage, Savile Row, London

english heritage – the first 21 years

Documents