I published the following post about Hardy’s Tree on 28th December 2022. Here, follows the original post and an update which suggests the tree and the gravestones were not erected by Thomas Hardy.
This is the day that Herod ordered the slaughter of the Innocents, or Childermas, and I am glad to see that my Grandson is now older than Herod’s prescription.
Hardy’s Tree in St Pancras Church, Camden, London has fallen down. Hardy was an architect and worked in London for a while, where one of his jobs was to supervise the clearance of the graveyard. Several poems of Hardy refer to the removal of graves from their original positions and in this case, the gravestones were set around an Ash tree that inspires many, including my Central St Martin’s students who used it in a project recently. So, I was shocked to read a Guardian article (since deleted) which noted the sad demise of the Tree.
Extracts from one of several Hardy Poems about moving graves and gravestones follow, but I need to update the post about the connection to Hardy. The Guardian has now got an article which suggests the connection with Hardy is a more recent one than previously thought (Guardian article).
I (and I think the Guardian) were alerted to this by the work of Lester Hillman, who wrote a Churchyard Guide and a recent pamphlet about the Tree, which is reported in ‘Context ISSN 1462-7574’. This is the Journal of the City of London Archaeological Society. Evidence proves that the Ash Tree dates to the 1930s, and that the mound of gravestones is from burials relocated from St Giles in the Fields, and therefore unlikely to have been in St Pancras at the time Hardy was responsible for clearing it.
So it is not ‘the’ Hardy Tree, but then nor was the tree at Sycamore Gap anything to do with Robin Hood. What it was, was a beautiful piece of nature, in a poignant setting. May she rest in peace.
The Levelled Churchyard Thomas Hardy
O Passenger, pray list and catch Our sighs and piteous groans, Half stifled in this jumbled patch Of wrenched memorial stones!
We late-lamented, resting here, Are mixed to human jam, And each to each exclaimed in fear, I know not which I am.
Where we are huddled none can trace, And if our names remain, They pave some path or porch or place Where we have never lain!
Screen Shot of the Virtual Tour of the Sir John Soane Museum
The Sir John Soane Museum is my second favourite London Museum. It’s the place I choose to take people who don’t know London. What I like about it is the atmosphere. It’s not a place I go because of the collection, it’s a place I go because I’m just awestruck when I enter the doors.
Architect Soane, made a Museum of his house, filling it with architectural and sculptural pieces but also some stupendous Art, particularly paintings by William Hogarth. But that isn’t my motivation to keep going back. It’s the Picture Room (and the domed ceilings). Soane had a great collection of paintings, but not enough walls. What he did was to design the Paintings Room. When you visit you go in, admire the paintings on the wall, and the attendant comes in, opens a shutter, and behind the great paintings are another wall of great paintings. And then he opens another set of shutters, and there, is another feast for your eyes.
Now, they have made high quality digital images of the rooms, and put them together using photogrammetry into a digital model which you can explore.
So, feast your eyes on it here: (choose Picture Room from the three options).
It’s not quite as user-friendly as it might be. Firstly, when the tour delivers you to the Picture Room, you have to take over control to go in and explore the 360 degree image of the room. Unfortunately, the pictures are not clickable, so you cannot get information about them from here. Also, the ‘hot spots’ which allow you to open the shutters, only reveal themselves, on my computer, if you approach them at a certain angle.
But don’t let this put you off, I’m sure you will find your way around. So go into the Room, look around, move the cursus, and you will see little signs pop up which open and close the shutters. Really, do try it! There are a couple of other rooms to explore too.
Oh, and the Dome Ceilings? Soane was a specialist in buildings that didn’t want windows in normal places. He was the architect of the Bank of England where windows in the walls were a security risk, and also of London’s first purpose built art gallery – the Dulwich Picture Gallery. Windows reduced the space for paintings, so he designed special low domed ceilings, and the Soane Museum is full of his experimentation in the form.
Scara Brae Three D Model
Another delight is the 3D model of Scara Brae which allows you to explore the Neolithic village, and walk around it. There are labels on this one, so you do get information too.
360 Degree Panorama Virtual Tours. My part in their development.
I was an early adopter of this form of virtual reality, setting up virtual tours of the Old Operating Theatre Museum in the 1990’s. I have a draft post of this which I have been awaiting time to finish, which I hope to finish soon….
Thanks to the Museum’s Journal article on Photogrametry of May/June 2022 for the two examples above.
It’s bad luck to buy, make or use a new broom in May because:
Sweep with a broom that is cut in May You’ll sweep the head of the house away.
But you can give good luck to a friend by leaving a branch of hawthorn flowers on the doorstep. But other woody messages were not so friendly according to traditional verses:
Alder for a scrowler; pear for the fair Nut for a Slut; plum for the glum Bramble if she ramble; gorse for the whores
It is basically rhyming slang, so no great wisdom involved, also I’m not sure quite how some of the rhymes work, and it does seem rather at the expense of women.
Replica of the Stone of Destiny at Scone Palace, Photo Kevin Flude
A study of the Stone of Destiny, the Stone of Scone, the Coronation Stone, has revealed new information. Firstly, it has some markings which look like three X’s and something like a V – perhaps Roman Numerals or more likely, crosses.
The Stone also revealed traces of copper alloy showing that a metal object had been attached to the Stone for a considerable time. The most obvious suggestion would be a relic associated with a Saint, and a Bell is one possibility.
Traces of gypsum suggested someone sometime made a plaster copy of the stone. No one knows when or why, and it has not been found.
Historic Environment, Scotland has released this fascinating 3-D scan of the stone for the public to view – it is annotated too.
You can read more at the links below, and thank you to Jean Kelly of the Britarch mailing list for alerting me to this.
The Stone has been moved from its permanent home at Edinburgh Castle for the first time since 1996, to be placed under the Coronation Chair for Charles’s May 6 Coronation at Westminster Abbey.
Coronation Chair, with Stone of Scone under the seat.
The Stone was kept at Scone before it was stolen by Edward 1 of England, who placed it under the Coronation Chair, at Westminster, to sanctify English Kings and to make the point that he was the overlord of the Scottish. In the 1950’s Scottish students stole it back, hid it for a few weeks and then left it at Arbroath Abbey. They did this because the so-called Declaration of Arbroath (1320) is a letter to the Pope asking for his endorsement of Scotland’s claim to be independent of England. The Pope agreed.
The Stone was recovered from Arbroath taken back to Westminster. The Labour Party under Tony Blair, granted Scotland back their own Parliament and as a symbol of their regained independence, the Stone of Destiny was taken back to Scotland.
Newspaper cutting showing the Stone being taken from Arbroath Abbey
To my mind it should be in Scone, which is where Macbeth and most other Scottish Kings were crowned, but perhaps they thought it should be in the Capital and in the safety of the Castle. At Scone, the Stone was placed on a mound of earth which was said to be made up of the dust from the feet of those attending Coronations symbolising the consent of all of Scotland for the new King.
360 degree Image of the Herb Garret (4th December 2000) at the Old Operating Theatre Museum. Click on the VR label to go full screen, and use the mouse to navigate.
Digital Heritage Is a subject I had a very early interest in. My, very minor claim to fame, is that I set up the Museum of London’s and the Victoria and Albert’s first computer systems. I then co-authored one of the earliest hyperlinked digital histories (on the history of London), and set up the first web sites for various museums and organisations such as the Old Operating Theatre Museum, Brunel Engine House, Garden History Museum, Royal Bethlem Museum etc..
But that was a long time ago so long that most of the Museums have changed their names! Despite the desire to do so, I have not had the time to keep up with developments.
So, I’m going to spend a little time investigating online heritage sites, and at the same time, maybe, look back at my part in the history of digital heritage.
Firstly, the principles of the study. Early on I came to the conclusion that the Internet should allow access to Museums for all those people who could not afford, or did not have the time, to visit in person. So, I’m looking for online/virtual visits that have something about them almost as good as a physical visit. Secondly, I’m looking for online exhibitions that provide an enjoyable experience that works in a similar way to a real exhibition. This means for me that the technology does not get in the way, and is not too complex to access and use. I also have an interested in digital guided walking tours.
I must admit that 40 years after I began to see the potential in digital I rarely see virtual visits or exhibitions that I want to spend time with. When I use websites for data and information, which I do all the time. I search, I find, I read but I don’t often linger for pleasure and. I rarely go back.
Yes we have Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality and the Metaverse, but they don’t really impact positively on my experience of heritage, history and museums. This might well be because I haven’t looked very hard, or spent much time on the subject in recent years, or because I don’t enjoy digital experiences that much, But, I’m going to have a good look around to see what is on offer, and I hope you will join me.
My starting point is the Old Operating Theatre Museum web site. I was in charge of the Museum for 30 years from the mid 80s onwards. In the early days of my management of the Museum I set up a very early web site designed to give those who could not visit a real idea of the Museum. This was achieved by the usual set of information pages but also with 360 degree annotated panoramic photos of the museum spaces linked together. This gave a simple and informative tour of the museum. which was easy to use, did not take long to see and did not depend on complicated technology on the part of the user. Later we added an online database of the collection to give access to the collection.
Thanks to the Wayback Machine – which is an amazing internet archive, no the internet archive, which archives old web sites, I have been able to retrieve a version of the site, dated to 2000AD so you can have a look at it. As you will see below it is very wordy but I think a really nice design by Highway 57 and Chris Sansom, who is also a composer, and now heading up an innovative jazz band called ‘Perfect Stranger’ .
Unfortunately, good though the Wayback Machine might be it does not have the technology to show the 360degree panoramas. So to get an idea of how they worked please have a look at the image at the top of the page, and imagine the addition of ‘hotspots’ which you could click to see further information or click through to the next panoramic view. Please note this is the second iteration of the site and so far I have been unable to find my original self-designed site.
The Old Operating Theatre Museum – www.thegarret.org.uk in 2000, retrieved from the Wayback Machine
So, I think the interactive tour of the museum gave a pretty good, simple and enjoyable tour of the Museum. I should say that the Old Operating Theatre Museum is one of the most amazing Museums. It is in the roof space of a Church and was a store for herbal medicines, and an operating theatre/emergency room for female surgical patients used before anaesthesia and antiseptic surgery.
Its now 23 years later. The website has been completely redesigned since I left, and it opens with a very good video that gives an excellent introduction to the museum. Click on the link to have a look at the video on the home page @ https://oldoperatingtheatre.com/
Inside the website is a huge amount of information, some very good videos, there is a ‘virtual tour’ which does not work on my browser for some reason, interactive games and a clickable image to explore the Old Operating Theatre itself. Its use of media is much, much better than in the 2000s, and the information is composed now into interesting stories rather than dry information. So a pretty good job of putting the Museum’s stories to the public in an engaging way. I would say however, that perhaps it was a little easier to find out the basic information about the Museum, the Operating Theatre, and the Herb Garret before than it now is. But you can ignore that as my vanity.
I have chosen one of the stories to include here and this is an object that I bought at an auction for the Museum. I remember the excitement well, and the great interest in the medicines that were included in the medical chest.
I am working on a new season, and these are the walks for the first six months – but more to come.
The Archaeology Of London Walk Sunday 2nd April 2023 11:15 Exit 3 Bank Underground Station To book Jane Austen’s London Sat 2.30 pm 2nd April 2023 Green Park underground station, London (north exit, on the corner). To book Chaucer’s Medieval London Guided Walk Aldgate Tube Sunday 16 April 2023 11.30pm To book Chaucer’s London To Canterbury Virtual Pilgrimage Sunday 16th April 2023 7.30pm To book The Peasants Revolt Anniversary Guided Walk Aldgate Underground Sunday 11th June 2023 10.45am. To book The Peasants Revolt Anniversary Virtual Tour Sunday 11th June 2023 7.30pm To book
Image credits: Concrete Interior or the Pantheon, FLICKR / CC BY-SA 2.0
The Society of Antiquaries Salon Newsletter has a fascinating report on an analysis of the virtues of Roman Concrete. Working as an archaeologist in the City of London, Roman concrete (opus signinum and opus caementicium) has long been a fascinating subject upon which I have pontificated (without a huge amount of research).
I first came across it at the GPO site just north of St Paul’s Cathedral and what I remember is the contrast to the sandy mortar of 10th/11th Century St Nicholas Church which we were also excavating.
Roman cement, which was pink, was incredibly hard. Medieval mortar was yellow and soft. You could successfully get through the medieval stuff with a trowel or, if you had to, with your finger nail. But opus signinum required a kango pneumatic drill. Properly, signinum has fragments of pottery bonded into the concrete, but we also found it used without inclusions.
Roman Cemement – Opus Signinum
According to the 10 Books of Architecture by Vitruvius (Marcus Vitruvius Pollio) it should be made using volcanic ash which outcropped around Rome and Naples. Without volcanic ash in Britain, the Romans ground down tiles/bricks and added it to lime and sand to make a very effective cement. It was often then ‘reinforced’ by using a mixture of cement and rubble limestone in the core of a wall.
As medieval Londoners dug under the City during building work or while digging pits, they often struck unlucky by hitting some rock-hard Roman foundations. The legend spread that the Roman cement was so hard because it was made of a magical formula that contained Bull’s Blood. (It was also normally said to be built by Julius Caesar!)
The Roman cement was also made in a water-proof version, allowing Roman amphitheatres to be flooded for naval re-enactments. All proper Roman archaeologists have also paid homage by going to Rome to see the totally amazing domed roof of the Pantheon, commissioned by Augustus’ right hand man Marcus Agrippa. Marcus Agrippa (27 BC – 14 AD).
So, this article by the Salon gives some explanation as to how the concrete vault of the Pantheon roof can have stayed up for 2,000 years and defied inevitable cracking. I have copied it word for word, (I did once ask if they minded and they said no) but also give a link to the original below.
By the way, the GPO site was a landmark in Roman Archaeology because it completely changed the view of early Roman London when we discovered densely occupied Roman houses, a long way outside of the area thought to be the core of the early City. And Vitruvius’s book on architecture is well worth reading. I might add a sample tomorrow?. Finally, I remember reading that when the Custom House in London suffered a collapse after only a few years, it was rebuilt by Robert Smirke (who also bulit the Classical British Museum building) using a new formulae for cement was is said to be the first concrete in Britain to surpass the quality of the Roman original.
‘Analysis of Roman Concrete Reveals Self-Healing Properties
Many of us will have stood in the Pantheon in Rome and wondered how this beautiful structure can still be standing today. It is the largest unreinforced concrete dome in the world, built under the emperor Hadrian in 126 AD. Researchers have recently been analysing the content and technique of mixing Roman concrete to identify why it has lasted so long and they may have uncovered its secret.
Admir Masic, Professor of civil and environmental engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, led the research project, working with Harvard University. In his paper published in Science Advances, Masic explains that Roman concrete contains millimetre-scale white lumps known as lime clasts, which may have helped seal up cracks, formed over time.
The Romans made concrete by made by mixing lumps of volcanic rock and other aggregates, together with a mortar such as volcanic ash, a source of lime (calcium oxide) and water. The lime clasts found were ‘porous with cracks’ and had most likely been formed at a high temperature in a low water environment. This suggests the quicklime was not mixed with water before it was added to the other ingredients as is the case in modern concrete, but was mixed with the ash and aggregates first. This ‘hot mixing’ produces heat, which helps set the concrete and reduces the water content around the lime clasts.
This means that, if subsequently, water seeps into the Roman concrete, it will dissolve the calcium carbonate and form new calcite as it passes through the lime clasts, which will help to seal up any cracks that have formed. Indeed, cracks filled with recently formed calcium carbonate have been found in Roman concrete.
Masic and his team tested this theory out by creating chunks of Roman-style concrete, containing cracks 0.5mm wide. They ran water over the concrete and in the samples containing lime clasts, within two weeks, the cracks sealed over with newly-formed calcite. Control samples of the concrete made without the lime clasts, did not seal.
Masic believes modern construction techniques could learn something from the Romans; ‘Roman-inspired approaches, based for example on hot mixing, might be a cost-effective way to make our infrastructure last longer through the self-healing mechanisms we illustrate in this study.’ An added bonus is that the development of a more resilient concrete ‘could help reduce the environmental impact of cement production, which currently accounts for about 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions’.
Image credits: Concrete Interior or the Pantheon, FLICKR / CC BY-SA 2.0′
A few days ago the Hunterian Museum announced the decision to remove Charles Byrne from display. I have been watching the case for many years. It’s a fascinating story which was retold by Hilary Mantel in her excellent book ‘The Giant O’Brien’ published in 1998.
Generally, I’m all in favour of human remains on display in Museums. My own feelings is that I’d love my old bones to be displayed in a Museum in a few thousand years time. However, Byrne’s story is particularly poignant and argues the opposite case. Bryne was a giant, he just could not stop growing until he died. He died young and after making a name for himself (as the Giant O’brien) on account of his soaring height. (look at the catalogue entry in the Museum online collection for details of Byrne’s condition.)
John Hunter was the pre-eminent surgeon of the time, and was furiously collecting as many animal and human specimens as he could. Fantastically interested in anything and everything anatomical, he gives a shape to a Doctor Frankenstein figure. For example, his interest in electrical experiment – trying to get dead frogs to twitch with ‘life’ and he had a very active engagement with the Body Snatchers in order to investigate what made someone tall, small, fat, thin, ill, healthy, intelligent, thick, good, criminal and so on.
He pioneered various surgical techniques. Postillions (the people who rode on the horses pulling coaches) were prone to aneurysms as the horses kept squashing their inside leg. Hunter developed an operation to bypass the aneurysm. He tried it out successfully and then kept track of the patient somehow. When the postillion died the Resurrection Men would pay a visit to the local graveyard and dig up the body of the patient. Part of his thigh is on display in the Hunterian Museum (or at least it was the last time I looked). So you can see the success of Hunter’s ground breaking operation – one of wave of surgical developments of the 18th Century. The Hunterian Museum is the museum of the Royal College of Surgeons, and was founded by Hunter.
So, Hunter hears about the Giant O’Brien and finds out he is ill, possibly dying. He has his people keep tabs on him. Charles Byrne is determined not to end up on the anatomist’s slab. So, he organises his funeral in advance paying guards to look after his coffin. He orders a secure iron coffin and in addition, decides to be buried at sea. Because Byrne knows, as an eminent surgeon later on reported to a Commons Committee, that it wasn’t a case of whether the Body Snatchers would get a body but more how much they would have to pay for it if they really wanted it.
But, Byrne thinks he has done enough to die in peace.
Unfortunately, Hunter’s men tracked down the guarded room, and bribed the guards with what would have been a huge amount of money. Byrne was taken back to Hunter’s place, the body melted down, mounted, and was on display until the Hunterian Museum closed for refurbishment recently.
So, a step forward as he is no longer the subject of the public gaze. But in this case we absolutely know that Byrne did not want to be the property of the medical establishment. My own feeling is that he should be given his last wishes and be buried at sea.
Reference collections are very important for Science, and it is for this reason, I am sure, the Museum has not let go of Charles Byrne. But in this case, with this history, an exception should surely be made? He died on 1 June 1783
View of London from the SE as it might have looked before the Roman Invasion
I have just finished a Guided Walk called ‘London Before And After The Roman Invasion’. Its the first time I’ve done this particular walk and it was very interesting because it focussed a lot of recent changes in ideas about early London. I decided to do the walk as wanted to refresh my knowledge of prehistoric London and the early Roman period.
So, when I first came to London as a young Archaeologist, we were engaged in a series of ground breaking archaeological excavations that completely revolutionised ideas about London.
So, old ideas were:
There was a prehistoric London
The City came into being as a Legionary Fortress built when the Roman Army was waiting for the Emperor Claudius to join them for the attack on the capital at Colchester.
A formal road system was set up on Cornhill, with the North/South spine being the road north from London Bridge
Southwark was a suburb on the other side of the bridge
The town grew steadily and eventually spread over to the western hill – Ludgate Hill
A fort was built in AD 120 then, c200AD, the Walls were built covering a large area because of the expanding City
The Romans left and everything went to hell in a hand cart.
The new set of ideas were:
People began to doubt the prehistoric London town in the early 20th Century, but it was completely dismissed by the 1970s and London was founded here simply because it was the best/only place for the Bridge and a superb site for the road junctions and Port.
By the late 1970s evidence showed that London did not really get started till about 50AD, so the idea that London was a military foundation following on from a Legionary Fortress was dismissed. Instead, it was a town of civilians established by merchants taking advantage of the Bridge, the Road Junctions, and the Port.
The formal road system was later than 43AD and Londinium was soon on both hills
Southwark was rather more like South Londinium than a secondary suburb.
Londinium had spread all the way to the later site of St Pauls by AD60 and its growth was very rapid. But decline set in as early as the 2nd Century. It struggled in the 4th Century and at the end of the Roman period there were not many people in it.
The area inside the 200AD wall was not densely crowded, and the large size of the walled area was provably due to military decisions about the best defensive alignment for the wall.
Roman London was already shrunken well before the end of the Roman presence in Britain.
Continued excavations created more data and the following discoveries were made
The foundation of London was dated to 48AD after dendrochronology dating of a wooden drain next to the main East West road through Roman London.
A Fort was built soon after the Boudica’s destruction of London in AD 60, just East of London Bridge
These two books were published and the new certainties about Roman London began to dissolve or resolve. Not yet sure which!
Lets have a look at those 7 points again:
‘There was a prehistoric London’ – Richard Coates in 1998 draw attention to the fact that the name Londinium is pre-Roman in origin and suggested it meant ‘Settlement by the flowing River’ Richard Hingley drew attention to the large amount of fine metal work in the river, and suggested a conclusion that , although there may not have been a prehistoric town before the Roman, the area was very important in the Iron Age, and suggest it was a ‘ritual landscape’ possibly associated with burial. Maybe, this might have been a factor in the Romans choosing the site to establish the crossing/town? Last year an excavation north of Liverpool Street found evidence of large scale feasting in the Late Neolithic leading some people to suggest London was an important ritual site before the coming of the Romans Dominic Perring dismisses ideas that it was an important area before the Roman period, and notes that most of the metal work is found further to the West. More about these discoveries in my post here:
Dominic Perring cites evidence at three sites on Cornhill which suggests that London was indeed set up as a temporary Legionary Fortress in AD43, and suggests the first Bridge was a Pontoon Bridge. And therefore indeed built when the Roman Army was waiting for the Emperor Claudius to join them for the attack on the capital at Colchester. It was immediately dismantled.
A formal road system was indeed set up on Cornhill, with the North South spine being the road north from London Bridge. This was set up in AD48, possibly still a supply base but began its transformation into a proper town c 52AD.
Southwark was much more than a suburb on the other side of the bridge and had important formal buildings, possibly including the residence of the Procurator, after the Governor the most important person in Britain.
The town grew quickly and soon spread over to the western hill – Ludgate Hill and the phases in this spread are detailed in Perring’s book.
A fort was built in AD 62 which continued to about AD 85, and was possibly replaced immediately by a precursor to the Fort in the NW corner of the City near the old Museum of London and replaced in stone in AD 120 then, in c200AD, the Walls were built covering a large area because of the military requirements.
I haven’t yet read the later London part of Perrings book, but he suggests that London develops when the Governor and the Emperor is involved in conquest, passification or development, and without government intervention London declines, so it develops in fits and starts and eventually the fits are more important than the starts and so it declines to virtually nothing.
Any way, congratulations to Dominc Perring who has created a really detailed description of the development of London. I’ve had to rethink quite a lot of my ‘old’ ideas and this is a great synthesis of the archaeology of London particularly over the last 50 years.
I’m sure I won’t agree with it all but I love the detail!
