How accurate are listed building descriptions?
- Mar 13
- 5 min read
WHC recently attended a webinar about Interpreting Listed Buildings, which was hosted by James Wright of Triskele Heritage. One of the key takeaways from the talk was that many of the official listed building descriptions are wrong!
List descriptions were created as a method of identifing the building in situ. Early listings were frequently more extensive and may have included the Inspector walking around the entire building and viewing the inside as well. This enabled them to note key features and make an assessment of the building's history and evolution, including the special architectural and historic interest of the building.
However, the description is not an all inclusive list, is not the only parts of the building that are listed and an omission of detail should not be used as justification for carrying out works.
The history of how the current listing system evolved is quite interesting. It began with the inception of The Society for the Protection of Buildings (SPAB) in 1877, then the Ancient Monuments Act in 1882, leading to the creation of the National Trust in 1895, the Ancient Monuments Consolidation and Amendment Act 1913 to the RCHME Volumes Inventory of Historic Monuments. However, the real push for listing buildings came after World War II when people started assessing how much damage was caused by bombings to their towns and cities and to their buildings. People felt that something needed to be done to protect what remained.
This led to the Government creating a salvage scheme and a national buildings record. In 1944 the Town and Country Planning Act was created with further changes in 1947. Some of the earliest listings took place from this point forward, noting that those early listings were some of the most spectacular or at-risk structures.
However, it was the push for large developments that took place in the 1960s and 70s where the threats to historic buildings were most significant. Large swathes of land were developed for ring roads and shopping centres. New urban areas were being created and the need for facilities grew as well.
This push for change was met with concerns for our existing built heritage. The Ancient Monument and Archaeological Areas Act of 1979 was created to record buildings, but only before they were demolished. The surveyors chose to speculatively record the buildings as they may have looked when they were originally built - not what they looked like then and there. This resulted in the lack of understanding of the buildings, their history and evolution.
The National Heritage Act of 1983-1984 was created to accelerate the listing process and English Heritage was formed to carry out the listing work and complete the task. The majority of the listing of historic buildings took place in the 1980s. However, undertaking a project of this scale was daunting and individual Inspectors were tasked with visiting and reviewing too many buildings which resulted in rushed descriptions.
In most instances Inspectors only reviewed the front elevation of the building (hence the myth that only the front elevation is actually listed). They rarely walked around the building and almost never went inside. The list descriptions were quite basic and based on less-than-optimal evidence to date or understand the building’s history and evolution.
In fact, it is believed that around 50% of all listings have inaccuracies in them. Interestingly, the information found to be the most incorrect is the dating of the building- somewhere between 50 years to several hundred years off in some cases! Apparently, in Wales their listing description dates are more accurate and use dendrochronology dating.
One of the reasons for these discrepancies is that many historic buildings have been altered during the 20th century and some of the original historic fabric may be covered up, if it still remains. Also, fashionable changes to architecture led to many buildings being ‘Georgian-ised’ or 'Victorian-ised’ meaning that some earlier 16th or 17th century buildings were encased with the latest design style.
It is impossible to determine the age of a building just driving by it. Visting the inside of the building is vital to understanding its history, evolution, age and significance. If possible, it is also a good idea to view the roof void or attic, as this can be a part of the building that has been least altered.
The Vernacular Architect Group (VAG), formed in 1952, has championed addressing the dating of historic building through an ongoing study. Since 1980, the VAG have documented lists of tree-ring dating reports publishing them in their annual journal Vernacular Architecture. These lists provide evidence of how old the timber in the building is, which can aid in understanding the age of the building.
This of course comes with a health warning that people recycled in those days as much as we do today- so never assume that any historic fabric is actually ‘original’ to a building. The list is sorted by county and from there you can look up by village. It is important to note that the lists are not all inclusive and is only a sampling of buildings in each area. However, it has been used to demonstrate the age discrepancies in list descriptions. Learn more at: https://www.vag.org.uk/dendro-tables/index.htm
Historic England (formerly English Heritage) is well aware of the inaccuracies and appreciates the daunting task to remedy the descriptions. If you own a listed building, you are able to log into their website and amend the listing is you have additional evidence. It is also acknowledged that the main goal in creating the listings was to identify each building and save them from being demolished.
Summary
The bottom line is never to assume a list description is fully accurate. Never assume that there isn’t an older building encased behind more modern fabric. Be aware that there are many historic buildings that aren’t listed that perhaps should be. These days many local authorities have Buildings of Local Interest Registers (BLIs) that are historic buildings of some age and significance where their retention is a material consideration in planning terms. There are now also Non-Designated Heritage Assets (NDHAs) which are also now being considered in planning assessments. If these buildings are located within a conservation area, there may be higher levels of protection or consideration as well.
James Wright said, ‘that if we have a healthy society that appreciates and understands its history and heritage and architecture, then all will be ok’ (paraphrasing his comments). Buildings matter, heritage matters, archaeology matters.
One of the most common questions people ask when speaking to a heritage professional is, ‘how old is my home?’ and the answer should not be presumed. It should be based upon as much evidence, research and understanding as possible.
Contact WHC for advice and support for your project.
Feel free to download the full listing information from HE for
Kings Collage Chapel
Comments