Stonehenge. A history in photographs, by JULIAN RICHARDS
English Heritage 2004. 118 pages, over 100 photographs. ISBN 1 85074 895 0 (£16.99)
For anyone interested in Stonehenge, archaeology, history and
photography this book will not disappoint. The original idea of the book was to
present Stonehenge using only aerial photographs. Fortunately this temptation
was resisted and Julian Richards’ deep knowledge and understanding of
Stonehenge has successfully been transmitted through the wide variety of
images, both in time and subject area. The text is rightly brief, informative
and easy to read; the readers’ eyes will be drawn to the images first but the
text does provide a very good commentary on 150 years of history, as well as
keeping us up-to-date on all the latest information on the dating (when was it
built?) and the origins of the builders of Stonehenge.
For me what the makes the book so important is that Stonehenge
(and therefore any archaeological or historical site) is not static; it is ever
changing. The photographs, taken over a period of 150 years, remind us if this
on every page. In addition they also show that the site means many different
things to many different people. The photograph of the Visit of the Grand Lodge
of Ancient Order of Druids (page 32), taken in 1905 should be contrasted with
the festival views taken in 1976 and 1982. One showing the restricted elitist
use of the site (but the sickle staffs of the Druids look like ‘question marks’
– as if to say ‘why is it here?’) and the others of a more open, accessible
approach. It can be argued that both approaches have their merits (but the
Druids were considered by the locals to be a total sham at the time) but the
greater the interest in the site, from as wide an audience as possible, the
better will be its future.
Another factor makes this book significant: good use of the
archives of the National Monuments Record (NMR) in Swindon. The NMR holds
literally millions of images, in one way or another connected to the ‘historic
environment’, in its broadest sense. If future authors, editors or
photographers see this book and it sparks an idea for their use of the NMR then
it will have served its purpose.
There are a few niggles, which probably only bother me and not
the general reader but why is it that only the aerial photographers do not
receive the credit or acknowledgement for their images? The image (page 112) of
Stonehenge showing a wonderful crop circle in the foreground, as if trying to
emulate the earlier, more permanent site, was taken by Roger Featherstone (now
retired, formerly with the RCHME). Roger deserves the credit, just as James
Davies does for his wonderfully atmospheric photograph on the final page, but
only the latter is mentioned. The date of the earliest aerial photograph (on
page 34) is also incorrect; we know it was taken in 1906 but the date of
January 1st is purely an administrative nicety for the NMR records; on the
previous page another photograph (which I have always assumed was taken on the
day as the following image) is labelled as dating to 1905, for which there is
no evidence at all; it too was taken in 1906.
Perhaps the most important point to make about the photographs
is that they are all in black and white. I am a great fan of black and white
photography and thought that this idea worked well; however I would have liked
to have seen one, perhaps two, stunning colour images, just to make the point
that there are many colour images of Stonehenge and that it is a remarkably
photogenic and colourful landscape.
The archives of the NMR are important for those engaged in the
future management of a site as they can help to understand the recent past. All
photographs are a record of the condition of the site; we see Stonehenge as it
is today not as it was left by its builders but as the result of 5,000 years of
use, abuse, neglect, repair, restoration and fabrication. Thus it is slightly
surprising that in the final chapter, ‘Stonehenge in 2004’, there was no
reference to the potential, enormous changes to the current landscape and the
way in which we experience Stonehenge. If funds and permissions allow, the road
system will be completely transformed making the Stonehenge landscape more
accessible to many but removing the car-park which attracts so many visitors to
the only the Stones and the henge. Linked to this is the Visitor Centre
proposal, if approved, which will be well away from Stonehenge. If these
proposals go ahead, and I hope they do, then we will be able to walk up the
Avenue and into the Henge, without the interruption, nay dislocation, of a
modern road. I understand why Julian wanted to keep away from the future as
this is a ‘history in photographs’, but history is a continuum and 2004,
although a significant year for Stonehenge, was just another cycle of solstice
and equinox, for which the site is so famous.
Robert Bewley
English Heritage
Review Submitted: January 2005
The views expressed in
this review are not necessarily those of the Society or the Reviews
Editor.
|