1. Background
Since 1994 English Heritage has been commissioning and undertaking research with the aim of improving understanding of recent military heritage as a sound basis for meeting future management needs. This sits comfortably within corporate and political agenda as set out in Power of Place and Force for our Future, which together recognise the need to view the historic environment in a holistic way, giving equal relevance to ancient and recent remains, and engaging a wider community by recognising and interpreting the historic landscape in all of its diversity.
Although surviving examples of military airfields, coast batteries, radar stations and pillboxes for example were recognised as having historic and archaeological interest since at least the 1970s, knowledge was insufficient to support robust conservation management decisions. We didn’t know how rare a surviving example of a Chain Home radar station was for example; we didn’t know how unusual it was to find the plan form of a heavy anti-aircraft gunsite intact. Yet, for a resource increasingly under threat, for example with the emphasis currently towards brownfield development, and reorganisation within the armed forces, the need to respond was immediate. From the mid 1990s it also became obvious that public interest in this subject was immense, as evidenced by numbers of book sales, television viewing figures for programmes covering recent military archaeology, and the numbers of visitors to monuments such as Dover Castle. Part of this was due to a burgeoning interest in the history and material culture of the familiar past, and part to the relevance of these recent sites for cultural and personal memory: they have social as well as cultural significance in other words.
It is a popular subject therefore, yet the resources are increasingly vulnerable to development pressure and new uses. It was for these related reasons that English Heritage undertook studies to improve understanding of recent military heritage. Some of the key issues are outlined here, with details of some of the recent projects. A selection of weblinks provides more information.
2. The recent past: why it matters
It is sometimes said that those working within the cultural heritage sector should not be concerned with the recent past: it is too recent to be considered ‘archaeological’ or even historical, and for objective judgements to be possible, for example concerning the significance of particular sites or artefacts.
Furthermore, some say that an archaeology of this period is unnecessary: ‘we know everything we need to know through documentary sources and oral history’. We disagree on all counts. Archaeology isn’t in our view something ‘ancient’ or beyond memory; and it isn’t necessarily things in the ground. Archaeology is a method of exploring and interpreting the world around us; it is a mindset – a set of skills and ideas which together combine to frame certain types of question. We deal in material culture, which can be both old and recent, and there are many published studies now which emphasise the benefits of using archaeology to ask new questions about own our times, recent times – as a critique on modern life. Recent military heritage is therefore one branch of a wider field of study. But it is appropriate that for now we separate it out and examine it as a subject in its own right.
Until recently this military heritage was poorly understood and it required focused research, covering specific questions into particular classes of monument to redress that. We needed to know for all classes what matters and why, and to do that needed first to establish what was built originally, how many sites, how broad the typological range was, where these sites were, why, and when they were subsequently removed. How many of the original population of sites survives today, and how complete are they? Are the surviving sites legible and coherent? Could visitors understand the enormity of construction effort in the Cold War by visiting the sites of that period that remain today? Could a visitor understand the workings of a World War II bombing decoy from what survives?
History can tell us so much, for example about the political climate of the time, and what might have happened if certain defence measures were not put in place. Local folklore and folk memory will reveal the impact of airfields for example on local communities. Artists inspired by monuments of war will offer an interpretation of current values that people attribute to what are often ugly, unsafe and unprepossessing places. But archaeology and the characterisation of this resource is best placed to determine the questions that require answers in the name of informed conservation and management.
3. Initiatives
English Heritage first commissioned work in 1995, the scope of this being significant classes of monument of World War II and – to a limited extent – the Cold War. This work also covered in part monuments of World War I and the inter-war years. Work was confined to sites in England, though subsequent projects commissioned by others extended coverage to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Our approach was to use documentary sources held in the Public Record Office (now the National Archive) to examine in detail the following classes:
- Anti-aircraft gunsites
- Operation Diver gunsites
- Bombing decoys of World War II
- Anti-invasion defences
- Coast artillery
- Civil defence
- Airfield defences
- Acoustics and radar
- Cold War (specific classes only)
- Operation Overlord preparatory sites
This work was undertaken by Colin Dobinson. Two of these studies have now been published as books, in the Monuments of War series, by Methuen in partnership with English Heritage. One of these has been made available in Braille.
This documentary work represented Stage 1, determining what was built, where and why. A second stage was required to determine which sites have survived and this was achieved using 1946 and recent aerial photographs. By examining one and then the other it was possible to determine which sites remained, and measure survival according to completeness. The result was that, despite their comparatively recent date, very few of these sites have remained, and that only a small percentage of those are anything like complete, with buildings and plan form remaining intact. Some classes have fared better than others, largely through their continued use through the Cold War period, though this inevitably involved significant alteration. This was the case with radar stations for example. This ‘Stage 2’ study was only possible for those classes visible on aerial photographs. The study was completed successfully for:
- Anti-aircraft gunsites
- Operation Diver sites
- Bombing decoys
- Coast batteries
- Radar
The work was undertaken by Michael J Anderton. A similar project has recently been completed for prisoner of war camps by Roger JC Thomas, and this can be accessed online at the Recent Military Page of English Heritage’s website (www.english-heritage.org.uk). A separate study by Paul Francis was undertaken to cover airfield defences, based upon the archives of the Airfield Research Group.
Beyond these studies into specific classes of monument are various other targeted research programmes, covering military aircraft crash sites, Cold War (beyond the four specific classes of monument referred to above), anti-invasion defences and defence landscapes, aviation, naval heritage, and wall art. A short explanation of each of these research areas follows:
Military aircraft crash sites
Given the scale of aerial operations over the UK since the earliest experiments with flight in 1911-12, it is not surprising that many aircraft have crashed in or around the UK, mostly during World War II. Interest in military aviation and aviation archaeology is growing, meaning that the archaeological remains are increasingly vulnerable. Currently licences for excavation are granted by the Ministry of Defence who in determining applications will take the likelihood of human remains and live ordnance surviving within the crash site in to consideration. Work by English Heritage, supported by MoD and the British Aviation Archaeological Council has suggested that historical significance should also be a factor. It isn’t suggested that crash sites should be preserved in situ necessarily. Rather that crash sites should be considered alongside any other archaeological site, with excavation fully justified, properly executed and archived. The English Heritage survey noted that particular care should be taken with those crashed aircraft which have historical significance, and criteria were defined for determining this. A Guidance Note is available online at the Recent Military Heritage page of English Heritage’s website (above).
Cold War
Monuments of the Cold War have been the subject of a major national study, culminating in the book Cold War: Building for Nuclear Confrontation (Wayne Cocroft and Roger JC Thomas 2003). This is a detailed account of the archaeology and architecture of the Cold War in England, covering everything from the United States ‘umbrella’, to observation and monitoring, to defence technology. Some sites which came to define Britain’s experience of the Cold War, and its role within NATO – such as Greenham Common – are described in detail. Alongside this study English Heritage also completed an assessment of Cold War sites in England, determining which were the key sites: which were considered of national importance or of special historic interest. This assessment was distributed to local authorities in 2001. Establishing a European and global context for this work has involved close liaison with other European and heritage agencies and interest groups and researchers in universities around the world. This has been achieved in part through the European Association of Archaeologists and latrely the European Archaeological Colloquium.
Anti-invasion defences
Anti-invasion defences were initially the subject of documentary research (referred to above). This provided context, information on typology and the strategic framework within which anti-invasion defences were constructed during World War II. What documents could not provide reasonably and cost-effectively however was information on where sites were, and what survives today, information that was needed if surviving defence landscapes were to be evaluated, and the most deserving cases subject to appropriate conservation and management. Between 1994-2002 the HLF-funded Defence of Britain Project used volunteers to record nearly 14,000 anti-invasion defences in Britain, of which nearly 8000 are pillboxes. Although not as comprehensive or as precise as the statistics now available for other classes of World War II monument, these figures are an accurate representation of what survives today, and can be set against the reliable estimate of 28,000 pillboxes originally built in the UK, suggesting c. 21% survival. From this work we now know how many of each type of anti-invasion defence structure survives, where it is and in what condition. This has enabled us to determine which examples in England warrant conservation management, and in some cases statutory protection.
But much of the value of these structures rests with their group value, and their landscape context. Here we have completed a national study of these defence areas, to determine which are the most complete, the most coherent and the most legible. We have examined both the defence structures themselves, and their landscape setting using aerial photographs from 1946 and today. We have also studied transcriptions made during English Heritage’s National Mapping Programme, for example in Suffolk. In all sixty-seven areas meet these criteria, ranging from discrete defended locations to longer stretches of defensive stop-lines. It is hoped that these areas can be used for interpretation and public access. A series of heritage trails is being considered for some of these defence areas. A report on this project will be circulated to local and unitary authorities during 2004. A book describing this project and the areas identified and studied is in production.
Aviation and naval heritage
Aviation and naval heritage have been subject to various studies, some of which are outlined above. But to provide context for the more focused research programmes two parallel studies have been commissioned: Colin Dobinson has been using documentary sources to examine development and change within military aviation architecture, including specific studies of some key sites such as RAF Hullavington and RAF Cranwell; while David Evans has studied architecture of the Steam Navy, and Royal Ordnance Yards. Typescript reports are available for all of these studies, though publications are also planned for 2004-5. Finally, a character-based study of the Royal dockyards at Plymouth and Portsmouth was recently completed. It is hoped that this will be available on the Internet in due course.
Wall art
Wall art includes paintings, engravings and graffiti painted on military buildings or in buildings in the context of military use. These representations serve a variety of purposes but have significance in documenting military occupation and use of space. Cultural differences between the services for example and between nations, and differences in the expressions of public and private space provide information on military buildings that cannot be drawn from other sources. English Heritage will shortly produce a Guidance Note on this subject. A short note is included in Conservation Bulletin 44 (p43-4).
Beyond these thematic and characterisation studies English Heritage has also supported or worked in partnership with local authorities, for example in Kent. Other work has been completed through local initiative, adding detail and ‘colour’ to the programmes of research conducted nationally. Research in Essex for example has considerably advanced knowledge of the country’s defence heritage, while Kent County Council has worked with partners in Europe to study historic town defences in Kent, West Flanders and Cote d’Opale.
4. Managing change
The work described here provides for the first time a comprehensive account of the scale and diversity of militarisation in England, and its wider geographical and historical context. Militarisation has had a significant influence on the changing character of the English landscape throughout the twentieth century, but only now can we appreciate fully the nature and speed of change and the scale of that influence. The research outlined here has value to archaeologists and historians studying the modern period, but also more specifically for English Heritage it has the related benefits of promoting public understanding and enjoyment of the historic environment, and providing the sound basis for informed conservation and management. Deciding what to protect for example, or what merits detailed consideration for determining planning applications can now be taken from a position of strength. We have a better understanding of the processes of change and decay. Within the context of the 1995 Monuments at Risk survey, our studies show significant decline of World War II monument numbers since 1946. We have a better appreciation also of managing what are often fragile structures and remains; work on wall art for example has caused us to consider methods for preserving spray paint graffiti, rather than just removing it. A set of published guidelines on managing military aviation sites has also been produced (available as above at www.english-heritage.org.uk). Finally, we have a clearer idea of research priorities and future directions. ‘Modern Military Matters: studying and managing the twentieth-century defence heritage in Britain: a discussion document’ (J Schofield et al. 2004) was recently published, and is now available in downloadable form online. This provides a statement of our current position, and where future priorities lie.
Further Reading & Contacts
Free English Heritage Publications are available from Customer Services. Some publications may be web-only:
- Monuments of War: the evaluation, recording and management of twentieth century defences. English Heritage 1998.
- Twentieth century military sites. English Heritage 2000.
- Historic Military Aviation Sites: Conservation Management Guidelines. English Heritage 2003.
- Military aircraft crash sites: archaeological guidance in their significance and future management. English Heritage, 2003.
- D-Day sites: sixty years on. English Heritage, 2004.
- Military Wall Art: guidelines on significance, conservation and management. English Heritage, 2004.
For general enquiries on military heritage, contact:
Dr John Schofield
Head of Military Programmes
John.schofield@english-heritage.org.uk
Roger J C Thomas
Military Support Officer
Rogerjc.thomas@english-heritage.org.uk
Danielle Devlin
Designation Team
Danielle.devlin@english-heritage.org.uk
