The Construction of Built Heritage

A North European Perspective on Policies, Practices and Outcomes

G.J. Ashworth, Angela Phelps

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN: 9781138730816
• eBook ISBN: 9781351742122
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Local & Regional Planning Public Policy
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This title was first published in 2002.Employing a range of case studies from three northern European countries - England, Sweden and The Netherlands - this captivating book explores the process of heritage conservation from theoretical initiation to practical expression. It traces the threads from the origination of conservation ideas by innovative individuals, their adoption by voluntary groups identified with particular conservation aims, to the inclusion of conservation policies in national legislation and international convention. A common cultural heritage underpins the diffusion of ideas across different systems within a similar time-scale. The ideas have been assimilated and adopted to differing degrees, providing the opportunity for questioning both the strength and purpose in heritage conservation, and the influence of the social and political context. This will be a stimulating read for an international audience of conservationists, heritage policy makers, conservation architects, planners and developers, urban design and planning scholars, and European and cultural studies academics.

PART 1

THE PRESERVATION OF THE PAST: NATIONAL CONTEXTS

2 The Conservation of the Built Environment in the UK

GRAHAM BLACK

Three characteristics are especially important in this field. First, the UK was the first country to experience the industrial, and accompanying urban, revolutions. Consequently, the radical shift in economic activities and settlement patterns was both experienced much earlier and more completely than on the continent. By 1851 more than 50% of the rapidly growing population already lived in towns and cities; by 1901 the figure was nearer 90%. It is not surprising that the reaction to this rapid change was also apparent early in the nineteenth century and that the British were in the forefront of the crusade for the preservation of aspects of the past. Secondly, the UK has been a leading player on the world economic and political stage for some centuries. More recently it has experienced an increase in the global significance of its language and associated cultural productivity. This has rendered UK heritage accessible to, and important for, a world-wide market, with evident consequences for the quantity of conserved structures and monuments, the nature of the interpretation and the size of the visitor market. The UK is thus a world leader in heritage tourism. Thirdly, and related to the UK’s history of global involvement, is the growth, especially since the Second World War, of large racial and ethnic minorities which, especially in the major cities, are developing a pronounced multicultural society which again has implications for what is conserved and how it is interpreted.

A legislative and practical framework for the conservation of historic buildings and areas is now an accepted part of national policy in the UK, attracting strong popular support for what are widely recognised to be assets of immense historical, cultural and social value. A century ago, the situation was very different. While a few lone voices called for protection, the UK government was still heavily influenced by liberal traditions of individual responsibility rather than state intervention and by an overriding commitment to private property rights. To achieve today’s conservation machinery, both these had to be overcome.

Issues surrounding the public’s willingness to accept the expansion of State intervention in general were important to the development of conservation strategy. In particular, the issue of private property rights is central to the development of conservation policies. Legislation for the conservation of the built environment permits the State to place major restrictions on the property rights of the individual, purportedly because this reflects, ‘a sense that the relics of the man-made past are important enough to inspire such appreciation and to justify such restriction of property rights in the wider interest’ (Hunter, 1996:1). This represents a sea-change in opinion and reflects the interdependency of the themes discussed below. Would the cumulative development of conservation legislation and policies have been possible unless supported, or even driven, by public opinion?

The Awakening of Public Opinion

A state-based conservation strategy is a very recent phenomenon in the UK, with the first legislation only appearing in the 1880s, no extensive State action until after 1945, and the most important developments with regard to the built environment only taking place since 1967. Its origins are in the rise of the antiquarian movement and the influence of a small elite. William Camden, the founder of British archaeology, published his historical and geographical survey of the British Isles in 1586. John Aubrey (1626-1697) wrote the first British book devoted to archaeological remains and also attempted a history of medieval architecture. The topographical writings of William Stukeley (1687-1765) included extensive coverage of British antiquities. As well as writers there were collectors and cabinets or galleries to hold and display the collections. However, concern for British antiquity was limited.

A resurgence of interest in the classical past amongst the aristocracy of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was followed by the ‘golden age’ of travel and acquisition during the Grand Tours of the eighteenth century. So long as the classical ideal dominated the thinking of the elite, there was little likelihood of an appreciation for older British buildings and monuments on a scale that might influence events. There were occasional antiquarian voices, such as Richard Gough or John Carter in the late eighteenth century. However, what mattered most was a switch in taste towards ‘Romanticism’ and the ‘Picturesque’. Initially, this was a cult of wild nature, but old buildings soon came to be valued for the harmonious way in which they merged into the landscape. A major literary influence came from writers such as Sir Walter Scott whose hugely popular historical novels, such as Ivanhoe (1819), encouraged a widespread fascination for all things medieval. General interest is reflected, for example, in the opening of the Tower of London to the public in 1828. By the 1850s it was attracting over 200,000 visitors a year.

Despite this emerging interest in historic buildings, particularly amongst the wealthy, educated elite, it is no surprise that the earliest legislation related to archaeological sites and monuments only. These were not lived in, so the issue of private property rights, though still vital, was not necessarily paramount. Equally, sites such as the Tower of London or Stonehenge came to be seen as ‘national antiquities’, associated with the rise of nationalism which was a feature of much of Europe in the nineteenth century. ‘Gradually … such feelings provided a seedbed for seeing such monuments as especially precious, and hence the State as having a role in guarding them, rather than leaving them to private individuals’ (Hunter, 1996: 5).

The Ancient Monuments Protection Act 1882 is the first conservation law in the UK. It followed proposals made since the 1840s and eight failed attempts from 1873-1880 to introduce more extensive legislation to protect archaeological sites. These faced overwhelming opposition in Parliament because of concerns for interference with private property rights and the potential cost to the taxpayer. It is equally unsurprising that this first UK Act relied on voluntary initiatives and the State could take sites into guardianship only with the agreement of the owner. However, the growing interest in archaeological monuments and relics did coincide with increasing attention being given to ancient buildings. We see this most clearly in the ‘repair’ and ‘improvement’ of medieval churches and cathedrals, beginning with the work of the architect James Wyatt in the late eighteenth century. Many of the ‘improvements’ made by Wyatt and his successors, such as Giles Gilbert Scott, were highly destructive of original detailing. Literally thousands of medieval churches were affected. The angry reaction of some scholars and antiquarians resulted in a very different view of how historic buildings should be protected. ‘We have no right whatever to touch them. They are not ours. They belong partly to those who built them, and partly to all the generations of mankind who are to follow us’ (Ruskin, 1880:197).

Meanwhile Romanticism began increasingly to influence new architecture with the rise of Gothic Revival, based on a strong appreciation of medieval architecture. The best known supporters of this movement are probably Augustus W. N. Pugin, architect of the Houses of Parliament, the writer and art critic John Ruskin, and the architectural theorist Eugene Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc. These writers were all looking to the new as well as to the historic. However, the effect of their work, and that of their supporters, in influencing public opinion towards conservation was profound: ‘(there could be no action to preserve monuments) unless there be in the mind of the people a certain force of intelligent belief (Brown, 1905:31-2). What we can now see, in retrospect, is the piecemeal nature of legislative provision, linked closely to upsurges in public interest. To understand the development of conservation legislation in the twentieth century we need first to explore how public opinion was galvanised.

First, one must acknowledge the campaigning role of national amenity societies, beginning with the foundation, by William Morris, of the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) in 1877. These societies worked particularly as educators and lobbyists. Most members have been enthusiastic amateurs, with their leadership frequently journalists or architectural historians, rather than architects. They have worked ahead of fashion. Thus, the Georgian Society was founded in 1937 out of rising concern over the rate of demolition of eighteenth century buildings between the two world wars, while the Victorian Society was founded in 1958 at a time when nineteenth century British architecture remained largely unloved. The process continues. For example, DoCoMoMo was founded in 1990 to defend the products of the Modem Movement. The real influence these societies now possess is reflected in the responsibility, enshrined in legislation, that a number have to comment on relevant listed building planning consent applications.

Alongside these are societies which have believed in taking more direct action. Best known is the National Trust for England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and that for Scotland, with their policy of conservation through acquisition. The National Trust is now the largest private landowner in Britain and played a central role, for example, in the conservation of, and development of public support for, the country seats of the British aristocracy. A different example would be SAVE Britain’s Heritage, an organisation which grew from the 1974 exhibition at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, the Destruction of the Country House. This is much more of a ginger group, with no ordinary members, which is expert in the generation of publicity on individual threatened buildings. However, it has fully understood the need to go beyond crying wolf. For buildings to be saved, they must be given a viable new use and SAVE has made practical proposals on how this can be done.

While these societies developed on a national scale, the period since 1945 has seen the rise of a grassroots movement, the local Civic Society. Today there are over 900 Civic Societies in the United Kingdom, with c. 365,000 members. They are represented nationally by the Civic Trust, founded in 1957, but most of the work is done on a local level, from campaigning about specific development proposals to raising local awareness in the built heritage. Civic Society members make photographic records, scrutinise local planning applications, promote quality new architecture and conservation schemes, run lecture programmes and provide trail leaflets and guided tours. Societies have been effectively supported by the media. The early development of a lay interest in architecture owed much to magazines such as Country Life, founded in 1897, Picture Post and Amateur Photographer, alongside the books produced by publishers such as the Batsford Press and, later, the monumental Buildings of England series by Nikolaus Pevsner. Later, radio and, particularly, television played a key role in widening interest amongst the public at large. For example, the television appearances of the poet Sir John Betjeman were crucial in influencing public opinion in favour of Victorian architecture. The 1960s and 1970s witnessed a rise in campaigning journalism regarding the destruction of the built environment, linked to an intense public reaction against the unprecedented scale of large area redevelopment then taking place. Major campaigning books, such as Fergusson’s The Sack of Bath (1973) and Amery and Cruikshank’s The Rape of Britain (1974), showed the impact of comprehensive development in historic towns.

Since then, the pressure for change has taken on a new form which it has been much more difficult to galvanise public opinion against. Rather than total demolition of large areas, we have witnessed the gradual alteration of detail and the introduction of small-scale infill which together, in the long run, can have as devastating an impact. Yet, with no great battles to be fought, it has been much harder for amenity societies to generate publicity. The battle for the hearts and minds of the British public has been won, but the war with developers continues in a more insidious form. ‘Most people place a high value on the historic environment — 87% think that it is right that there should be public funding to preserve it. 85% think it is important in the regeneration of our towns and cities. 77% disagree that we preserve too much. It is seen as a major contributor to the quality of life. The historic environment is seen by most people as a totality. They value places, not just a series of individual sites and buildings’ (MORI survey of people’s attitudes to the historic environment quoted in English Heritage, 2000:1).

Establishing the National Framework

Listed Buildings

On what basis should a State make a decision to protect in perpetuity examples of its built environment? Previous generations were happy to replace old buildings with new, normally for purely practical reasons. The new was not seen as a threat. Buildings, unlike archaeological monuments, were lived in. To ban change was a direct interference in the rights of the law-abiding property owner to do with his building as he saw fit. Nevertheless there is substantial evidence in Britain from the 1870s, of concern over the destruction of individual buildings while, from 1867, the Royal Society of Arts began fixing commemorative tablets to identify the homes of famous people. By c. 1900 there was a more widespread reaction. The National Trust was founded in 1895 (and the National Trust for Scotland in 1931). In 1896-7 the London County Council instituted mechanisms to act if an historic building was threatened. The first volume of the Survey of London appeared in 1900. In 1908, three Royal Commissions on Historical Monuments (RCHM) began to work, in England, Scotland and Wales. Their role included the making of an inventory, ‘of the ancient and historical monuments connected with or illustrative of the contemporary culture, civilisation and condition of life of the people…from the earliest times to the year 1700’ (Royal Warrant establishing the RCHMs, 1908). Lord Curzon reflected the growing public opinion in his speech during the debate on the Ancient Monuments Consolidation and Amendment Act 1913. ‘They are part of the heritage of the nation, because every citizen … feels an interest in them although he may not own them … I believe they (the owners) do generally recognise that they stand with regard to these monuments not merely in the position of private owners of property, but that they are owners of that which is, in a sense … a national possession, for which they are trustees to the nation at large’ (Lord Curzon, Parliamentary debate 1912, quoted in Hunter, 1996:44).

While the legislation remained weak in terms of the protection afforded, the principle of protection in the public interest, including restrictions on the rights of the private owner, had been accepted, at least with regard to ancient monuments. Once this basic decision is made, how does one decide which buildings should be deemed worthy of retention and who should make those decisions? At this stage the brief to the RCHMs, referred to above, shows that what were considered important in 1908 were medieval churches, castles and other structures, together with early specimens of vernacular architecture, and culminating with the heroic age of the architect Wren.

It was not until the Town and Country Planning Act 1932, fifty years after the pioneering Ancient Monuments Protection Act, that local authorities were given power to make preservation orders for buildings of special architectural or historic interest. However, each order had to be approved by the relevant government minister. The reality is that the development of both conservation powers and criteria for selection had to depend on a combination of the overcoming of prejudices and the development of new areas of interest. Latterly, both economic justification and the selection of exemplars have taken on increased relevance.

When the first lists of key buildings were produced as an emergency measure in 1940-1942, following the first serious air raids, ‘the dating criteria were to include all medieval buildings; all good examples of any category down to 1750; and from 1750-1850 only buildings outstanding in their class. In this last division, selection was to be made sparingly and with great care’ (Harvey, 1993:1). The criteria for selection defined here, and in 1947-1948, reflected a prejudice in favour of individual buildings and a bias in favour of the work of specific architects, especially pre-Victorian ones. The vernacular tradition and more repetitive terraces or groups of buildings were seen as of inferior quality, whatever their attractiveness in terms of the built environment. One result was that in this first listing, whereas some of the towns were covered fairly adequately, the survey of rural areas tended to be no more than a gesture.

These initial lists were begun in 1947 and were expected to take three years. The primary function of the first list was to provide unambiguous information for town planners, and for private owners, on what buildings ought to be kept in the much-heralded renewal of Britain after the war. Their introduction was, therefore, both a protection measure and a support for re-development. An inventory of what society considered to be of value would make informed decisions possible. When the first listing was completed in 1970, twenty years late, it was universally acknowledged as inadequate: a national re-survey was already under way using much wider criteria and the concept of Con...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• List of Contributors
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Abbreviations
• INTRODUCTION
• PART 1: THE PRESERVATION OF THE PAST: NATIONAL CONTEXTS
• PART 2: CASE STUDIES
• CONCLUSION
• Subject Index
• Place Index