Leaders of conservation thought The influence of Ruskin and Morris Lord Kennet’s achievement Inspired by John Ashurst Institute of Historic Building Conservation No 184 June 2025
www.pierra.co.uk Building Restoration, Conservation & Stone Masonry Unit G34–G36, Crown House, Home Gardens, Dartford DA1 1DZ Tel: 01322 556691 Email: enquiries@pierra.co.uk Follow us on @PierraRLtd pierra-restoration-ltd pierraltd
CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 1 www.ihbc.org.uk @IHBCtweet Registered as a charity in England and Wales number 1061593, in Scotland number SC041945, and listed in Northern Ireland Company Limited by Guarantee Registered in England number 3333780 Registered Office: Jubilee House, High Street, Tisbury, Wiltshire SP3 6HA Officers President Rebecca Thompson, president@ihbc.org.uk Vice President Torsten Haak, vpresidentth@ihbc.org.uk Chair David McDonald, chair@ihbc.org.uk Vice Chair Lone Le Vay, vchair@ihbc.org.uk Secretary Dave Chetwyn, ihbcsecretary@ihbc.org.uk Treasurer Jill Kerry, treasurer@ihbc.org.uk National Office Director Seán O’Reilly, director@ihbc.org.uk Operations Director Fiona Newton, operations@ihbc.org.uk, consultations@ihbc.org.uk Administration Officer Lydia Porter, admin@ihbc.org.uk Education,Training & Application Support Officer Angharad Hart, training@ihbc.org.uk Membership Services Officer Carmen Moran, membershipservices@ihbc.org.uk Professional Services Officer Michael Netter, services@ihbc.org.uk Committee Chairs Policy Roy Lewis, policy@ihbc.org.uk Membership & Ethics Andrew Shepherd, membership@ihbc.org.uk Education Chris Wood, education@ihbc.org.uk Communications & Outreach Dave Chetwyn, communications@ihbc.org.uk Branch Contacts North north@ihbc.org.uk North West northwest@ihbc.org.uk Yorkshire yorkshire@ihbc.org.uk West Midlands westmids@ihbc.org.uk East Midlands eastmids@ihbc.org.uk South south@ihbc.org.uk South West southwest@ihbc.org.uk East Anglia eastanglia@ihbc.org.uk South East southeast@ihbc.org.uk London london@ihbc.org.uk Scotland scotland@ihbc.org.uk Wales wales@ihbc.org.uk Northern Ireland northernireland@ihbc.org.uk Republic of Ireland republicofireland@ihbc.org.uk Rest of the World overseas@ihbc.org.uk 2 Briefing 4 Letter 5 Periodically 8 Out of Context 9 The writer’s voice 11 Editorial 12 Inclusive, values-based conservation to 2008 Kate Clark 17 John Ashurst: practitioner, writer and educator Chris Wood 20 SAVE at 50: celebrating half a century of campaigning Eve Blain 23 Lord Kennet: making government work Rebecca Madgin 25 Discovering Jane Jacobs Joe Holyoak 28 Nineteenth-century conservation thinking from Ruskin onwards Duncan McCallum 32 Replacing Brighton Museum’s roof lantern Edward Lewis and Olivia Stitson 34 The world of generative AI SammyWoodford 36 Old buildings and oligarchs Ian Wray 40 Law and policy update Alexandra Fairclough 43 Notes from the chair 44 Director’s cut 46 New member profile 47 New members 48 Inter alia 49 Vox pop 50 Reviews 53 Products and services 56 Specialist suppliers index
Editor Rob Cowan Editorial Coordinator Michael Taylor, ihbceditorialboard@gmail.com Editorial Board Nigel Crowe Aimée Felton Peter de Figueiredo (book reviews) Rebecca Madgin Duncan McCallum Fiona Newton Jonathan Taylor Michael Taylor (chair) Cartoons and illustrations by Rob Cowan Context is distributed to all members of the Institute of Historic Building Conservation. © Institute of Historic Building Conservation 2025 ISSN 0958-2746 Publisher Cathedral Communications Limited, High Street, Tisbury, Wiltshire, England SP3 6HA 01747 871717 context@cathcomm.co.uk www.buildingconservation.com Non-member subscriptions to Context Context is available to corporate bodies at an annual subscription rate, including postage, of: United Kingdom £65.00 Elsewhere £100.00 Context on-line archive Past issues of Context can be viewed on the IHBC website. The archive provides a searchable database and reference for key articles. See www.ihbc.org.uk/page55/context_archive. The views expressed in Context are not necessarily held by the IHBC or the publisher. Neither the publisher nor the IHBC shall be under any liability whatsoever in respect of contributed articles. We gratefully acknowledge the support of firms whose advertisements appear throughout this publication. While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this issue of Context is current and correct, neither the IHBC nor the publisher can be held responsible for any errors or omissions which may occur. Context themes and copy deadlines Context is published four times a year in March, June, September and December. The next three themes and copy deadlines are: Technical: roofing, September, issue 185 (11 July) Infrastructure, December, issue 186 (10 October) Regional: Wessex, March, issue 187 (9 January) Please contact Michael Taylor at ihbceditorialboard@gmail.com to discuss any editorial submissions or for information about the Context editorial board. 2 CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 Briefing Leaders of conservation thought The influence of Ruskin and Morris Lord Kennet’s achievement Inspired by John Ashurst Institute of Historic Building Conservation No 184 June 2025 Cover: John Ruskin, illustration by Rob Cowan Restoration plans for Lutyens’ garden suburb church After Storm Barney, in November 2015, knocked the weathervane off the spire of Sir Edwin Lutyens’ St Jude-on-the-Hill Church in Hampstead Garden Suburb, it became clear that the tower was unstable and needed repairs. Funds were raised for this essential work, but it was only one part of a wider programme of increasingly urgent structural and conservation works required. Until recently the church, lacking a congregation sufficient to provide for its repair needs and for the cost of a vicar, was threatened with closure. The Grade-I church remains on the building-at-risk register, and after unsuccessful bids for grants from the National Lottery Heritage Fund in 2015 and 2016, the team is bracing for fresh fundraising, grant applications and support. Repairs to the church’s roof and its foundations demand immediate attention, while further investment is needed for the supporting facilities, the fine organ and the restoration of the wallpaintings. St Jude was designed by Lutyens starting in 1908 as the centrepiece of the garden suburb, the model community conceived by Henrietta Barnett in 1907. Its tower sits at the suburb’s highest point, the Central Square framed by The Institute (now the Henrietta Barnett School), the Free Church and both churches’ residences, the vicarage and the manse, all designed by Lutyens. The way forward may be in building on this as a campus. Lutyens adopted a lightweight, thin-wall and hollow-box form of construction, probably to reduce the deadload of material on the foundations, which are on clay. Its bricks, of an unusual size, were specially commissioned. When the removal of a fractured brick enabled the architects to see inside the hollow-box construction, it turned out that the brickwork of the tower was without cross bonding or cross-ties. The returns at the sides of the hollow-box corners are constructed on stacked half bricks, which were not bonded into the corner flanks. The lack of bonding meant that it was an inherently weak structure, highly vulnerable given its exposure to prevailing winds. Steeplejacks and scaffolding were needed for the work. The approved recipe for the restoration work’s lime mortar was as close as possible to Lutyens’ original: 3.5 natural hydraulic lime with grey additive, Bath stone dust and a number 28 sand mix. All materials for this work were supplied by the Cornish Lime Company. Significantly damaged, it was necessary to replace the cockerel finial with a lighter equivalent. The finial’s ball alone was 53 kilos Steeplejacks fitting the new weathervane to St Jude’s spire, with Hampstead Garden Suburb Free Church, also designed by Lutyens, visible beyond it. (Photo: WallWalkers)
CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 3 clear glazing, bringing daylight across the foyer while revealing subtle views of the 1830s National Gallery building by William Wilkins. Conversely, the clear glazing allows those outside the Sainsbury Wing, for the first time, to see the grand stair and the activity within. The palette of natural materials used throughout the new spaces includes the same grey Florentine limestone (pietra serena) employed in the Venturi, Scott Brown galleries, along with Chamesson limestone from northern Burgundy, slate, oak and black granite. of Douglas fir. The near-replica is an exemplar of design and craftsmanship. The original finial did not go to salvage but, skilfully re-assembled, stands heroically inside the church. This year the church will also begin a major project to restore its famous and extensive scheme of murals by Walter Starmer (1877–1961). Painted mainly over a 10-year period from 1920, using the spirit fresco technique, the murals cover most of the interior. The Courtauld will provide on-site restoration training, and the church is bidding from trusts to help meet the £700,000 cost. A rare survival for its date, the scheme has been hailed as a key part of the church’s unique aesthetic. It is certainly the largest complete collection designed by a single artist in the interwar years. At the heart of the garden suburb’s community, St Jude has strong musical interests and good acoustics. Choral scholarships have been run at the church for nearly a decade and there is an annual programme of Proms at St Jude. Its cathedral-like splendour makes it a chosen venue for film, recording and events. The Lutyens Trust and Lutyens Trust America are working with the minister, the Rev Emily Kolltveit, and the growing fabric team at St Jude, headed by David White. The Lutyens Trust is a society dedicated to promoting the preservation of Lutyens designs, his collaborative work, and the spirit and substance of his heritage. It is not a source of grants. It works to inform, research and engage, including support for those responsible for Lutyens’ buildings. For more about the restoration, contact fabric@stjudeonthehill.com or about the trust, deborah.mays@ lutyenstrust.org.uk. Donations can be made towards the restoration via the church’s website. Sainsbury Wing re-opens The National Gallery’s new main entrance, designed by Selldorf Architects, in collaboration with Purcell heritage architects, has opened. The renovated Sainsbury Wing is intended to improve access for all while enhancing the public realm in Trafalgar Square. The project includes a cafe, restaurant and bookshop. The aim has been to work with the Sainsbury Wing’s original Grade I listed design of 1991 by Venturi, Scott Brown and Associates, while substantially improving visitor flow within and without the building. The National Gallery claims that, with new double-height volumes to the east and west, ‘the foyer retains the sense of compressed and released space and the mannerist play of the Sainsbury Wing’s complex postmodern architecture’. It further celebrates the grand stair leading to the unchanged early Renaissance galleries, also by Venturi, Scott Brown. The original dark glass of the side-lit stair has been replaced with Walter Starmer’s mural in St Jude’s apse. The Courtauld will provide on-site training in the restoration. (Photo: David White) This summer (18 June–21 September 2025) Sir John Soane’s Museum will present the UK’s first retrospective survey of Richard Rogers’ life and work since his death in 2021, with an exhibition focusing on the architect’s eight favourite projects from 1967 to 2020, including the Zip-Up House, the Centre Pompidou, Lloyd’s of London and the Millennium Dome (seen here, image courtesy of RSHP Drawings). The Sainsbury Wing Foyer looking south (Photo: National Gallery, London, Edmund Sumner)
4 CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 Efforts to persuade the county to include a clause in the heads of terms to give the community first refusal fell on deaf ears. The preferred bidder has not yet even been publicly named. The county’s response to a recent freedom of information (FOI) request was that contracts had not yet been exchanged. Nothing has yet been disclosed regarding what public benefit may be achieved by the sale. The case is worth publicising as a warning about local authority property owners failing to set an example as owners of listed buildings; failing in their statutory duties regarding them; failing to resolve unauthorised works; and excluding legitimate community interests. While the county has compounded its disregard for the community in relation to the former library, the nearby Gateway from India continues to offer a shining example of what local communities can achieve. This reincarnation of the former Hindu shrine from the library building was thanks to the enthusiasm and energy of local people. Now Piero D’Angelico and Abdul Kayum Arain of Mill Road Traders and Cambridge City mayor Baiju Thittala have catalysed a proposal for a United Indian Army War Memorial Fountain, to commemorate the four million soldiers of the British Indian Army who gave their lives in the first and second world wars. This will stand near the Gateway, next to Mill Road (one of Britain’s most multicultural streets), and in front of Ditchburn Place (built as Cambridge Union’s Workhouse in 1838). This was an emergency wartime hospital from 1939-46, then a maternity hospital, and is now social housing for the elderly. The community spirit is alive and well in Cambridge. Whether the former library will play any part in the local community in the future is another matter. John Preston Gateway from India shows what local communities can achieve (Photo: John Preston) Letter Mixed news from Mill Road From John Preston, Cambridge Further to my articles ‘The battle for Cambridge’s Mill Road Free Library, Parts 1 and 2’ (Context 179 and 180, March and June 2024), Cambridgeshire County Council decided to sell the former library out of public ownership. After a six-month moratorium, seven bids were received, including an updated community bid. To give local people (whom the county had still not consulted on selling their library building) a voice, my wife Kati and I drafted a change. org petition, which has gained over 3,100 signatures. In October 2024 the county council announced: ‘Mill Road Library set for a bright artistic future’. The committee had decided to sell it to an unnamed ‘community-minded bidder’ who had neither bid previously nor engaged in any way with the local community. County officers cited the bidder’s unconditional offer and his claimed ability to complete in 30 days as reasons for recommending his bid. County officers continued to present the disposal of the former library solely as a commercial transaction, disregarding the strong community concerns. In the same meeting, after the preferred bidder for Shire Hall had pulled out, the county’s director of finance recommended the councillors to go to the bidder next in line. Had officers taken the same approach for the former library, a year earlier when Centre 33 pulled out, the community bid, then placed second, could have already been up and running in the building. Instead, the former library stands empty.
CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 5 Periodically Historic Environment The leading item among the eight areas of competence for IHBC members is philosophy: knowledge and understanding of conservation theory and the social, cultural, political, aesthetic, economic and environmental values that underpin current conservation policy and practice. Readers should therefore find the latest bumper issue (running to 223 pages) of Historic Environment: policy and practice (Vol 15, No 4, 2024) to be particularly informative. Perhaps the most interesting and insightful paper is by independent scholar and IHBC associate Alfie Robinson on the importance of the listed building survey in England 1982–1989. This forms a thought-provoking counterpoint to the major evaluation of listing from a national amenity society perspective by Matthew Saunders, published as a Historic England Research Report (No 27, 2021); and a particularly useful update on the substantial 42-page paper on the National Resurvey published by no fewer than seven collaborative authors, led by Martin Robertson and published in the Transactions of the Ancient Monuments Society in 1993. Both of the latter studies are easily and fully accessible online. Alfie Robinson asserts that the list inherited today, in numbers, distribution and quality, owes as much to the efforts of the seven years between 1982 and 1989 as it did to the other seven decades of listing combined. What is particularly helpful about Robinson’s paper is the context it provides regarding the evolving nature of the listing surveys in the 1980s, as reflected in the interpretations that day-to-day heritage management has to place on listings in the 21st century. It notes, for example, concerns about the time and resource pressures, particularly when dealing with rural areas, as reflected in building descriptions. The paper is a useful reminder that it is only the address that is statutory, and that the descriptions were invariably required to be brief. For today’s practitioners, concerned that buildings in their area might have been missed, there is also a reminder that the gridded OS survey maps required that every building on each portion of that map had to be inspected, including isolated cottages and farm buildings, and that inspectors needed to be prepared to walk behind street frontages and around farmyards to assess every building. Descriptions of listed buildings changed noticeably after 1982. Before then, they did not usually need to explain why the buildings were important or say if they were valuable. Listing fieldworkers were writing for an expert audience, with listing descriptions never intended to be made easily digestible to the general reader. Instead, descriptions were to be exact, using set formula and required readers to make the correct inferences from what was written and, indeed, what was not written. Practitioners who today struggle to interpret ‘legacy’ descriptions from those produced currently should bear in mind that the criteria for listing could only provide a framework within which knowledge and discernment had to be employed. When faced with legacy descriptions, it is worth returning to past listing guidance notes (first issued in 1979 and for the second phase of survey in 1984) to have some sense of what value or otherwise could be ascribed to the less fulsome entries of that era. Robinson has some insightful observations to make about the concept of group value, introduced in 1970 but applied at some scale for the first time in the 1980s survey. Group value is of interest in inviting reflections on the policy aims of the overall project. How many would make up a group and on what basis? On the one hand, group value risked being the most inclusive of the survey criteria, potentially elevating ‘marginal’ buildings into listed status. On the other, the guidance was explicit about the risks of over-listing, aware of the already substantial planning controls of that era to shape development. 11 mm Volume 15 Number 4 2024 The Historic Environment POLICY & PRACTICE POLICY & PRACTICE The Historic Environment ISSN 1756-7505 Volume 15 Number 4 2024 ISSN 1756-7505 www.tandfonline.com/yhen The Historic Environment POLICY & PRACTICE Volume 15 Number 4 2024 CONTENTS Editorial Editorial 15.4 Politics, Philosophy and Economics Michael Dawson 443 Research Articles Intangible Cultural Heritage and UK Built Heritage Practice: Opportunities and Future Directions Johnathan Djabarouti 450 Towards Enhanced Built Cultural Heritage Conservation Practices: Perceptions on Industry 5.0 Principles and Enabling Technologies Alejandro Jiménez Rios, Maria Nogal, Vagelis Plevris, Rafael Ramirez and Margarita L. Petrou 466 Reconstruction as a Tool for ‘Ideological Preservation’ in the Three Former Ottoman Capitals of Turkey Pnar Aykaç 493 The Dilemma of Urban Heritage Conservation in Post-Con ict Bamiyan: A Critical Analysis of Causes, Failures, Consequences and Prospects Reza Abouei and Mahdi Tavasoli 517 Energy Ef ciency and Socio-Cultural Values in Public Policy in the City of Stockholm Stina Hagelqvist, Mattias Legnér and Paula Femenías 540 Unmasking Dominant Features in a Transformed Cultural Landscape Marta Rusnak, Andrew Tadeusz Duchowski, Agnieszka Tomaszewicz, Izabela Garaszczuk, Anna Brdulak, Małgorzata Biegańska, Zo a Koszewicz and Daria Dobrasiak 564 Determination of Shoreline Variability for Adaptation of Maritime Built Heritage to Climate Change: A Case of Southern Kenya Coast Wallace Njiiri, Mugwima Njuguna and Ephraim Wahome 594 Underwater Cultural Heritage in World Heritage Sites: Figures and Insights into Possibilities and Realities Elena Perez-Alvaro, Martijn Manders and Chris Underwood 611 The Importance of the Listed Buildings Resurvey in England (1982–1989) Al e Robinson 644 Taylor & Francis takes seriously its commitment to sustainability. In addition to all paper used in our journals being from certi ed responsible sources, this journal is plastic-free and no longer uses plastic cover lamination or polywrap for mailing. Our print publications are certi ed CarbonNeutral® in accordance with the CarbonNeutral Protocol, meaning the emissions from production, shipping, and end-of-life disposal have been compensated for through the purchase of high quality, third-party veri ed offsets. YHEN_COVER_15_4.indd 1 2/3/2025 6:37:56 AM
6 CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 In some concluding observations about the exhaustive nature of the survey practice between 1982 and 1989 that would inevitably lead to a substantial rise in the number of entries, the author emphasises the most crucial thing being the ‘special’ element, going right back to the 1947 Act and the risk that mediocre, unimportant or excessively common buildings would be included in the list, thus reducing the specialness of the assets that had been protected. This would seem to have significant implications for the impetus behind the identification of nondesignated heritage assets, and their status as material considerations only in the planning process. Of the other eight substantial papers in this issue, of particular note is one by Jonathan Djabarouti of the Manchester School of Architecture about intangible cultural heritage and UK built heritage practice. Djabarouti examines opportunities and future directions in the light of the UK’s ratification of the convention in March 2024. He investigates how this commitment could shape built heritage practice in the UK, and whether a more integrated relationship between tangible and intangible qualities of heritage could be developed. After giving a broad introductory overview, the article concentrates on Historic England guidance and initiatives to demonstrate how shifts in policy and practice could materialise in response to the convention. Djabarouti proposes three opportunity areas that might emerge: first, the evolving understandings of heritage, community and participation; second, recognising the mutual influence of the intangible cultural heritage and physical heritage; and third, the need to strengthen placebased cultural practices. Also of significant interest, as we wrestle with the issues around the implementation of net zero, is a paper from Sweden by Stina Hagelqvist, Mattias Legnér and Paula Femenias looking at energy efficiency and sociocultural values in public policy in the City of Stockholm. Although the city promotes itself as being worldleading in the climate transition, the authors argue that the city fails to take a holistic approach to sustainability and does not provide sufficient guidance on how energy efficiency and cultural values can be reconciled. They present two case studies of renovations that serve to demonstrate how policies have translated into practice, and how claims of energy efficiency and cultural values are assessed. They find that there is clear asymmetry between the steering of policy related to energy efficiency and cultural value respectively. A major issue they see is that there is no clear guidance on how to deal with old buildings. This is especially a problem when people need to make these buildings more energyefficient and do not know what is allowed. This paper will be particularly informative to those in the UK wrestling with similar dilemmas concerning policy and practice regarding everyday heritage assets. Journal of Historic Buildings and Places A substantial publication that would definitely justify readers’ membership of Historic Buildings and Places is its annual Journal of Historic Buildings and Places (Vol 4, 2025), which runs to 200 pages. The issue contains six substantial papers, reflecting the society’s aims and objectives of studying and conserving heritage assets of all periods and styles. The first paper is by John Darlington, director of projects for the World Monument Fund, where he leads UK-based initiatives. Entitled ‘Fake Heritage or Faithful Homage: why we reconstruct the past’, it was the annual lecture given to the society in 2023. The author has some particularly wellchosen examples in asking why the issue of fake or copied heritage is relevant today, and why we should care (or not). He argues that the past is important as it colours the places we live in and visit, contributes to character and local distinctiveness, and helps establish our place in the world. Darlington argues that, crucially, history gives us the power of memory, without which we have no recall and therefore risk reinventing the wheel, repeating mistakes or making rootless decisions. He uses some excellent examples to illustrate the issues, such as from China, where European heritage is often replicated (he includes an illustration of a housing estate in Hangzhou, modelled on Haussmann’s Paris, with a miserable shrunken version of the Eiffel Tower); from Saddam Hussein’s reconstruction of Babylon; and the replication of medieval townscapes in Germany following the severe damage of second world war. Depending on how you see it – a collection of lies and imitations, or a tribute to the past – the main points are: think about the goals and energy of those who shared their stories. But also, be wary of the origins of nationalism, and question those who do not pay attention to evidence and science. He writes that curiosity is often the best defence for understanding the motivation behind these monuments. This is a fascinating discussion in relation to the pressures that arise from time to time in heritage management to hbap.org.uk ISSN 2753-2453 ISBN 978-0-946996-40-7 JOURNAL OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS & PLACES 2025 VOLUME 04 JOURNAL OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS & PLACES hbap.org.uk 2025 VOLUME 04 COVER J#04.indd 1-3 14/03/2025 11:58:04
CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 7 accede to pastiche. Dealing with heritage of all periods brings us to a re-evaluation of the iconic BT Tower in London in the Historic Buildings and Places Stephen Croad Prize essay for 2024. The award was established in 2019 in memory of the former head of the National Building Record at the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England. Contributions for the prize document new discoveries about historic buildings in the UK, and essays on building conservation and heritage crafts, are also welcomed. The 2024 winner, Tavia Swain, explores the historical framework of the BT Tower, placing it within a political, social and technical context, and evaluating the structure’s trailblazing unique qualities both in form and function. The author also references the excitement, glamour and pride surrounding its former unprecedented popular appeal. The paper argues that by comparison with its contemporary status, its progressive engineering was a technical triumph that marked it as a monument to past glories – or a lost Britain. The future of the BT Tower appears to depend on the 2024 sale by BT to MCR hotels for £275 million, with the objective of preserving it as an iconic hotel and securing its place as a London landmark. The journal also includes a Stephen Croad Award entry for 2024 by Christopher Painter, a London architect. He looks at the contested narratives surrounding Binney Walk, a linear block at Thamesmead, which Stanley Kubrick used as a location for his 1971 dystopian film A Clockwork Orange. The paper discusses the spatial criticisms of post-war modernist architecture and looks at lessons such designs have to offer and how they could shape future housing delivery in the UK. Painter touches on the political pressures facing the building in the late 1970s and the debate about the dismantling of modern design features in the name of safety, which came to a head in the 1980s. He concludes by asking: what if more people thought differently about the buildings we built for housing after the war? And what if, instead of saying those welfare state buildings are bad and tearing them down (which wastes the energy used to build them and means we build new things), we tried to learn from them? What if we respected why they were built and found a better way to use them? The journal (formerly the Transactions of the Ancient Monuments Society) is well known for shedding new light on both buildings and their architects. In this issue, Richard Hewlings puts Mount Edgcumbe in Cornwall in a context that could be discerned as international as much as local and national. Peter Howell examines the life of Samuel Joseph Nicholl, a somewhat obscure figure from the 19th century but an important designer of many Roman Catholic churches; and Chris Miele discusses the rebuilding of St Mary Abbotts, Kensington, by Sir George Gilbert Scott. The church, one of a group of large parish churches dating from the end of Scott’s long and illustrious career, was designed over the course of 1866 and 1867, and opened for worship in 1872. Particularly notable is the beautifully detailed and proportioned tower and spire that rise 278 feet from the ground, making St Mary’s one of the tallest church spires in England and Wales. SPAB Magazine The Spring 2025 issue of the SPAB Magazine, highlighting women in conservation (‘Forging brilliant careers’), is introduced by trustee Jo Thwaites, chair of SPAB’s education and training committee. She draws attention to the fact that while most of the UK construction industry pays some attention to the gender gap, and that excellent equality diversity inclusion strategies reach a wide audience, the proportions have not increased much over the last 20 years, with only 15 per cent of surveyors being women, compared to 11 per cent in 2000. Barely two per cent of the construction workforce on site are women. Fortunately, the gender gap appears to be much lower in professional heritage management. The current issue of the magazine highlights women in conservation and those who are already forging brilliant careers in the sector, highlighting role models past and present, but illustrating the old maximum ‘you can’t be what you can’t see’. Thwaites notes that conservation and heritage work has attracted more women than the rest of the industry, but it is hard to find the data and research as to why. She asks why the building construction industry, which contributes five per cent of the entire UK economy, cannot be more like its own heritage sector and try to include women as an equal part of the workforce? The overall number of women working in the sector is low compared to men even though there are skills shortages and currently 36,000 job vacancies, the highest in 20 years. She thinks that some of this is regrettably down to outright sexism but also often to a lack of the opportunities in construction offered to young women and girls, and to a simple lack of vision. Readers might like to refer back to this reviewer’s recent THE SPAB MAGAZINE SPRING 2025 Women in conservation Forging brilliant careers Rochdale Town Hall The challenges of revitalising a 19th century masterpiece E M Gardner’s rich legacy From national suffrage to watermill campaigning Lucy Newport Life as a Conservation Accredited Engineer
8 CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 column regarding the Heritage Crafts Red List (‘Periodically’, Context 182, December 2024). Heritage Now In the latest issue of Heritage Now (No 11, Spring 2025), Historic Buildings and Places director Liz Power reviews the society’s centenary year. As the society has appointed Sara Robertson as its new chair, an illuminating article asks her some searching questions about her vision for the charity (and asks her about the five buildings that have played a particular part in her career so far). As the recent £7.5 million restoration of Newhaven Fort, a scheduled ancient monument, nears completion, Neil Harrison, head of commercial development at Wave Active, which operates Newhaven Fort, and Alan Corbett, managing director of Pilbeam Construction, explain the process of conserving an under-regarded ‘hidden heritage gem’ in East Sussex. Pat JonesJenkins of the Grade II* listed Ruppera Castle Preservation Trust (formed in 1997) explains the trust’s work aimed at reversing the decay of the present ruins, stemming from a significant decline of the estate in the 1930s, and a tortuous planning history of failed developer conversion plans in the 1990s and 2000s. Bob Kindred MBE HISTORIC BUILDINGS & PLACES HERITAGE NOW The Magazine of Historic Buildings & Places | www.hbap.org.uk NO. 11 (SPRING 2025) ‘A SUCCESSFUL example of adaptive reuse for more than 20 years, it’s often been quipped that more moments of genuine “popular culture” took place in the student union than ever did in its original guise as an institutional pop-museum. Surely, it’s time for a third act?’ The Twentieth Century Society commenting on the risk of demolition faced by the National Centre for Popular Music in Sheffield, designed by Branson Coates, which opened in 1999, closed in 2000 and was later Sheffield Hallam University’s students’ union. ‘I’D BE THE first to say that there are improvements that really need to be made to the planning and heritage protection system to make it operate more efficiently, but we have a system which generally operates reasonably well. The growth in heritage consultants over the years has significantly improved the quality of countless applications, however the resources in local authorities to deal with the applications are stretched to breaking point. ‘With the best will in the world most local authority elected members, planners and conservation officers probably won’t be fully informed on all the finer points of every specialist area of heritage. Which is why heritage charities such as the Gardens Trust provide such an invaluable service to local authorities (and the communities those councils serve) by helping ensure wellinformed decisions are made in a timely manner. Their views are not binding, and their inputs are meant to be there to help set a particular site in its local, regional, national, or sometimes international, context.’ Duncan McCallum, chair of SPAB, giving his personal view on LinkedIn of the government’s proposal to remove a limited number of statutory consultees and narrowing the scope of others from inputting into planning decisions. ‘DO YOU remember Annex C of PPG15? Although it was cancelled about 15 years ago, to me it still captures and distils much of the way we think about listed building management. Its messages have been shredded and largely repackaged in other (voluminous and disaggregated) guidance documents, but I think some of the simplicity and directness has been lost as a result. Annex C still contains the core language used to debate change affecting historic buildings. ‘I am not, of course, suggesting it can or should be resuscitated in its original form. It would need some updating if it ever again saw the light of day. My regret is that we do not have a succinct 5,300 word go-to equivalent in 2025. ‘Perhaps I will be told that things are more complex now than they were in 1994, and that we need ever more guidance to swim through. Really? Much of what I see in heritage impact assessments and consultation responses can be traced back to Annex C. Those of you who once used it in anger might like to cast a nostalgic eye over it. Those of you who know it only as a folk memory might like to ponder on how many of its homespun exhortations still stand, more than three decades after it was issued.’ Jonathan Edis writing on LinkedIn
CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 9 The writer’s voice Individuality and style From ‘Mediaeval Design’ by John Harvey, Transactions of the Ancient Monuments Society, 1958 It is sometimes alleged that artistic individuality and personal ‘style’ did not exist before the Renaissance, that term being used in the specific sense of the revival of interest in the forms of Roman art in 15th-century Italy. It is very hard to find any supporting facts for this view, and it is unusual to find even the most elementary precautions taken in such comparisons as are instituted. We must confine comparison and contrast to works which are truly comparable, for in the first place it must be constantly borne in mind that artistic personality in the fullest sense, is the exception at all periods and in all arts, while the majority of artists are relatively undistinguished. Think of the minor dramatists of Elizabethan England, the lesser contrapuntal composers of Bach’s Germany or the background of common form of the later 18th century against which the personal styles of Haydn and Mozart stand out, the general run of paintings of the Dutch School, the architecture of Wren’s contemporaries. We cannot expect to find many artists of highly developed individuality in any one art at the same time, nor to find, for example, that a 13th-century parish church or a manor house of 1450 has the same degree of personality that exists in St Paul’s Cathedral or Blenheim Palace. But the converse also holds true: it would be rare indeed to find two medieval villages with house fronts resembling one another in quite so stereotyped a fashion as do many Georgian streets, while every one of the important builds of different dates at cathedrals, palaces and castles is marked by its own character, demonstrating the personal style of its designer, known or unknown. Returning for a moment to the Renaissance, the revival of classical forms did, it is true, lead to the discarding of an existing set of traditional conditions, but only to impose another set of at least equal, if not greater rigidity. In the architectural field this new straitjacket consisted of a series of arithmetical rules of proportion given by Vitruvius and interpreted in the light of surviving Roman buildings and fragments. Now it is a somewhat remarkable fact that the text of Vitruvius’s books on architecture had never been lost in the West, and did not have to be rediscovered at the Renaissance. Copies of it existed in a number of the more important monastic libraries and fresh copies were being made up to the 14th century, while there is a considerable body of evidence showing that its structural precepts had to a large extent, passed into the common body of European technical tradition. Occasionally Vitruvius is even cited by name. But until the 15th-century Italian revival of interest in the antique, Vitruvius was not used as a manual of design, aesthetically considered. I want to suggest that the reason for this disuse was not ignorance or neglect, as has generally been assumed, but the supersession of the Vitruvian principles of proportion by another and more highly developed set of principles. It was pointed out more than 50 years ago by the French archaeologist and art historian, Camille Enlart, that there is a fundamental difference between architectural proportions in the classical world and those of medieval times, in that the latter had a constant reference to human scale. If one Greek or Roman temple was built to twice the length of another, every one of its parts was multiplied in the same ratio. But in the works of the gothic period the designers’ appreciation of natural fitness had taken a further step, possibly as a result of making the observation that a large tree has leaves of the same size as those of a small tree of the same kind. Whatever the source may have been, the gothic architects were in fact in possession of a most elaborate geometrical system which for long remained a carefully guarded secret.
CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 11 LEADERS OF CONSERVATION THOUGHT Editorial Making sense of it all How did historic building conservation get to where it is? Every decision or action that we take is a response, conscious or subconscious, to ever-changing ideas. We can trace them back to John Ruskin, perhaps, but he stood on the shoulders of a host of earlier pioneers and antiquarians. Chronicling the evolution of conservation is not just a case of listing the big names. In every generation, countless thinkers, writers, practitioners and teachers influence each other, apply new methods, and try, succeed or fail. Some are remembered for their contributions, while many others are soon forgotten and may have never realised their own part in shaping developments in their field. Ideas evolve through a complex interaction between conservationists, architects, planners, archaeologists, landscape architects, architectural historians, surveyors, journalists, teachers, politicians, community leaders and many more. Thinking about conservation from various parts of the world influences theory and practice as thinkers and practitioners interact. At one time the debate focused on the respective merits of aesthetics and authenticity, repair and restoration. Later, technical issues have been augmented by the idea that the historic environment’s different values need to be taken into account: evidential, historical, aesthetic, communal, cultural, social and environmental; and that different people value different aspects of historic buildings and places. An asset’s protective designation will reflect and describe some particular aspects that are valued. But some people may value other aspects, and appreciate those being taken into account when the future of the asset is considered. Making the case for conservation depends on relating it to the big themes of the day – themes which themselves evolve as thinkers and practitioners, including politicians, try to make sense of our intractably complex world. The theme may be economic regeneration, sustainability, climate change or resilience. Building conservationists are skilled at explaining how central our skills and knowledge are to each of those issues. The latest big theme is ‘wellbeing’ (see Context 183, March 2025), which seems likely to provide a useful conceptual framework to use in pulling together many strands. In time, like all such concepts, it will no doubt be seen to have limitations, and a new generation will move on to the next big idea in our worthy attempt to make sense of the process of living in and managing the historic environment. This issue of Context focuses on ‘Leaders of conservation thought’. Not all of them, and our authors refer to many people who, while not being big names, have played a significant role in promoting positive advances in the field. What emerges is a complex entanglement of people, ideas, perspectives and practices by which historic building conservation is advancing – and we are all in there somewhere. Illustration by Rob Cowan
12 CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 KATE CLARK Inclusive, values-based conservation to 2008 What matters and why, and to whom? Those questions, and the importance of being open to different views of heritage, were the focus of key figures in the world of conservation. Any review of influential conservation thinkers cannot ignore major policy shifts shaped not just by individuals but collectively. The authors or contributors to public policy documents are rarely named, most do not publish or are constrained by public sector codes of conduct from doing so. But their influence has been significant. This article draws on personal memories to identify some of the people involved in the shift towards a more inclusive, values-based approach that recognises conservation as not just a technical or an architectural design challenge, but a social process grounded in the complex values that people hold for their heritage. Individuals such as James Semple Kerr, Liz Forgan, Mike Coupe and Paul Drury were part of a much wider movement inside heritage institutions that emerged in the short decades of growth preceding the swingeing cuts of the noughties. That period fostered innovative thinking whose legacy can still be felt today, including the ‘people-based’ thinking of the (then) Heritage Lottery Fund. Inclusive, values-based conservation Inclusive, values-based conservation or thinking is a shorthand term for a group of trends in conservation thinking that are reflected in a series of documents such as the Burra Charter (1979), Conservation Issues in Strategic Plans (1993), Conservation Plans (1998 and 2002), Power of Place (2000), the Heritage Lottery Fund’s first two strategic plans, Capturing the Public Value of Heritage (2006) and the Conservation Principles (2008). Taken together they mark a shift in conservation thinking that recognises conservation as both a social and a technical activity – one that requires the ability to read, respect and work with the fabric of landscapes, buildings and objects grounded in the original SPAB principles – but also recognises that conservation can never be a neutral, value-free activity. Instead, it requires the practitioner to understand and work with the multiple different values that people hold for their heritage. Inclusive values-based thinking is not about experts imposing their values on others. Instead, James Semple Kerr was a pioneer of values-based thinking. (Drawing by Rob Cowan) Exeter High Street in around 1895
CONTEXT 184 : JUNE 2025 13 LEADERS OF CONSERVATION THOUGHT the skill lies in reconciling multiple different values. These values often work against each other, creating tension in conservation decisions. This applies to everything from replacing a timber to accommodating housing growth in a city. It is not about ranking values or ticking boxes. Instead, it is about uncovering the complexities of what matters, and why and to whom in any situation, and finding creative ways to reconcile conflicts between, for economic and cultural concepts of value. Values-based conservation plays out today in critical conservation methodologies – land-use planning, heritage and environmental impact assessment, conservation or management planning, community engagement, and facilitation or evaluation. Each involves using an understanding of what matters, and why and to whom to inform about decisions, alongside grappling with technical issues and working within the context of the legislation. Understanding cultural values alongside economic value is also relevant to appraisal, business cases and funding applications for conservation activities, projects and organisations. Origins The roots of some of this work lie in London and Australia in the 1980s. James Semple Kerr, a former Qantas quality engineer, relocated to London with his wife Joan Kerr. In the evenings they studied with Nikolaus Pevsner at Birkbeck college, learning to ‘read’ buildings. Joan became an eminent art historian and Jim one of the earliest students on the fledgling York conservation course, writing a thesis on convict architecture. Returning to Australia, Jim joined the National Trust, which was benefitting from the sudden (and rare) injection of funding to the new Australian Heritage Commission, supported by the 1972 Whitlam Government. At the same time, people such as Sharon Sullivan in the New South Wales parks and wildlife services were in the forefront of establishing protocols for cultural landscapes, heavily influenced by Indigenous perspectives on culture, heritage and landscape. These themes of a contested history, a nascent Australian built heritage conservation discipline often working with very recent structures that might not even be seen as heritage in a European context, and the challenge that Indigenous cultural heritage philosophies and values brought to land and place management, came together in the Australian Burra Charter. First published in 1979, the charter was drafted by a group including Jim Kerr, Jane Lennon, Peter Watts, Josephine Flood, Peter Forrest and Richard Mulvaney. Concepts of value were not new in heritage conservation, but previous heritage charters had implicitly assumed shared common values. The Burra Charter challenged that assumption. It also grounded heritage thinking as a process flowing from understanding through values and current issues to setting policies for dealing with change. As a new and different way of thinking about heritage conservation, Sharon Sullivan and others ensured that the Burra Charter was rolled out with an extensive education programme and resources, and a later initiative around natural heritage. Australian heritage agencies soon followed with other values-based guidance on local heritage, migrant heritage, social value, community mapping and engaging with communities. Sadly, the rapid expansion of resources under the Whitlam government was short-lived and that flurry of creative thinking was curtailed. Values-based thinking in the UK The (then) Heritage Lottery Fund was key to bringing that more inclusive, values-based thinking to the UK. Australian architect Susan Macdonald came to the UK, initially to work in Peter Inskip’s office before joining John Fidler’s team in English Heritage. Susan had been in the forefront of innovative thinking in the New South Wales Heritage Office in the 1990s and Peter was a trustee of the Heritage Lottery Fund. Facing some complex decisions about major investments in heritage sites such as Whitby, Peter suggested that values-based conservation planning might both help the HLF make better decisions, and empower applicants to understand what was important, and think about the long-term care and management of the site. John Barnes, then of the English Heritage major projects team, asked for help because (as an industrial archaeologist) I was familiar with Jim Kerr’s work and thinking. Under the visionary and inclusive chairmanship of Liz Forgan, the HLF was already challenging established approaches. Its origins in the National Heritage Memorial Fund meant that, unlike other established agencies, it was not confined to heritage silos, but could work across landscapes, collections, biodiversity and buildings, and movable heritage. It was already taking a people-based approach, recognising the need to support both technical conservation and heritage activities, and supporting a diverse range of groups and organisations through such projects as Young Roots or the work on public parks. Judy Cligman commissioned the HLFs own guidance on Conservation Plans for Historic Places, published in 1998. Because it built on UK thinking, it was very different to Jim Kerr’s earlier guidance (1982). The HLF approach Nikolaus Pevsner taught James Semple and Jean Kerr how to ‘read’ buildings.
www.buildingconservation.comRkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzI0Mzk=