Mountain MemorialsIn issue 28 of The Scottish Mountaineer, we carried an article by Glyn Jones looking at the growing number of memorials appearing in our mountains. [read it here]
The photographs below are of a memorial on Ben Ledi to Sgt Harry Lawrie who died while on mountain rescue duties. Many would say that the memorial was worthy, but is such a prominent place near the summit of one of our most popular hills appropriate? As Glyn asks, do mountain memorials collectively have a worse impact than litter, their presence merely encouraging more?
The debate has been sparked by the proposed erection of a statue commemorating Norman Collie and his local guide John Mackenzie on Skye. Mike Dales, our Access and Conservation Officer, considers this in the report below.
Please read Glyn's article, and add your thoughts on this subject using the form at the foot of the page.
YOUR COMMENTS
Richard Spenceropens the debate: There are memorials and memorials! I've stood by Shackleton's grave and cross in a magnificent setting with a view to die for (sorry! He did!) over Grytviken with Mount Padget behind and Cumberland Bay spreading out on the other side, and thought it very fitting.
On the other hand I find the accumulation of memorials all over Scotland's hills and road verges repellent! I think that there has to be a distinction made between memorials marking the place of death (or, perhaps, "historic event", e.g. the Glen Finnan Memorial) and Bob's favourite place, or the child whose soul apparently inhabits the Pap of Glencoe!
In past times when religious belief, including regular worship, was normal, the bereaved could take comfort in the Church's firm assurance of the life everlasting, and lay a posy on the grave on anniversaries, in a well-kept Scottish Kirkyard (or an overgrown English Churchyard!), but today, for many, that is gone. Indeed cremation, although cheaper, and sparing of precious real estate, robs the mourners of a grave space, which the Crematorium "Garden of Remembrance" hardly fills. Yet these are not, for the most part, convinced atheists, but modern people who just have some nagging idea or hope that death is not the complete end of everything, but don't know what it is that survives, or where, and it is they, I believe, who want the memorials as some sort of tenuous contact with the "other world".
For me, I'd remove now, and to the "Civic Amenity Site" all memorials that are not site specific, and that for me does include the sacred "peace cairn" on the Ben. Those that now mark the place of the accident or death, I'd map, log and record and leave them for a fixed period to seek to cover the pain of those who erected them - perhaps 25 years, after which the next generation should remove each and "make good" the sites.
We have had an exciting and wide ranging access debate since devolution, and never once have I heard it suggested that there is any right to erect memorials or other cairns on the land of another. To go up a hill, lugging cement, sand, trowel and memorial plaque with one is not, IMHO, "responsible access" but vandalism. Perhaps we might follow the German system in city burial grounds, when the grave space is leased for 25 years, with one renewal for the like period possible, after which the space is dug over, the remains tossed respectfully into an ossuary, the stone, if surviving, put against a wall, and the space levelled and turfed for re-use. If high level memorials really are necessary (and I do not think they are) then we should agree a protocol covering land owner's agreement, maintainance, and eventual removal and make good after, say, 25 years.
If the departed's earthly souvenir is at the top of a hill, it is going to get more and more difficult for the parents and then the widow/widower, as the years pass by to come and remember and weep a little. If they can do it in a memorial garden, where it will be clear to them that they are not alone in their grief, then they may more easily have some comfort. An even better memorial, of course, would be a solid bit of MRT equipment or structure, even bearing the name of the deceased, as often do RNLI life boats. Several MBA bothies display internal plaques recording that renovation of the bothy was carried out in loving memory of, for instance, Flt Lt Jeffrey Jenkins and his dog Xyrion (does anyone know anything about them?) which is another constructive, useful, non intrusive way of remembering the dead.
The facility proposed for Glen Nevis of a memorial wall/garden, all abilities accessible, (the Coullin MRT have just such a facility already near their Operations Centre by the Sligachan Hotel) seems to me an excellent compromise, which could well be adopted by other areas, and which could provide a legitimate opportunity for MRT's to rattle the tin.
From J Fairey:
From Allyson:
From Matt: If a person loved the hills, they loved them for the way they were, so why add a memorial if that person died, especially when there are so many more helpful/longer lasting alternatives.
Well done to the MCofS for having the guts to attempt to tackle this very sensitive issue.
From Robert G McFarlane:
Laura McB:
Dennis Morrod:
Ian Bowie:
Gareth MacDonald:
Sam Clayton:
Paula Fraser:
Iain Ogilvie: Mountains should be kept as places of wilderness and whilst people may rightly wish to scatter a loved ones ashes, I do not think it is proper to impose any unsightly memorials on the top of mountains.
John Fidler (a sassenach)
Ali Cameron: Make-shift memorials do address this issue but are still, in effect, littering; and could worsen the problem as it would be easier to carry a number of such items up the mountain (creating more litter) than one big, permanent one - and probably be more likely to blow away/break free and litter elsewhere!
I would endorse entirely the memorial wall/garden proposal, and also remembering loved ones in ways that benefit the countryside that they obviously enjoyed in a constructive manner.
Duncan H:
I agree with the zero tolerance point of view and intend to be scattered over the shelter stone crag myself (hopefully in another 80 years or so rather than as a result of incompetence on my next route there). I feel that the crag and the location are a sufficient headstone for anyone.
However, a friend who died in his early twenties has a memorial cairn in a remote spot, and I would feel uncomfortable to know it had been cleared. The approaches that are being taken seem very sensitive and laudable. Hopefully they will encourage unobtrusive memorials and biodegradable tributes as the alternative will be that fiery preachers like Ms. Grey will provoke a new reformation and roving bands of iconoclasts will be smashing up cairns and prising off plaques indiscriminately.
Heather Pots:
Douglas R Small:
Fraser Mackenzie: I walk Highland moors and hills and I like to see the sheilings and the green spots where the people stayed and am happy if a cairn or memorial indicates something has happened at a particular place. Memorials cause me to reflect and give an interest to the journey. If I want to find out more I'll research it . Never does the presence of these ever interfere with the view unlike the wind farms, pylons, ski-lifts and funicular which are seemingly acceptable. Planning permission? Who can respect that? But if the owner says its OK it should be fine. But no new owner should come in and start interfering with what's there on the ground already. That is vandalism.
The Duke of Sutherland's monument on Ben Bhraggie is a fine example of public art- and I certainly feel that the Peace Cairn on Ben Nevis should be left alone.
It is perhaps only in recent years that unofficial memorials have become plentiful - so what? Pick up the plastic teddies, the artificial flowers and other kitsch if it offends you but leave the plaques. It's only a matter of taste after all and who is to say that your taste should have any primacy over that of the bereaved.
Captain Maryon's Cairn on Skye, Sandeman's Stone, Carn Anthony, Ferguson's Cairn in Ross-shire, Bowlby's monument in Knoydart have been in place for 50 years and more as has Lewis Macdonald's memorial in the Cuillins. Of course the little teddy on the plaque to the child on the pap of Glencoe can be accused of being in bad taste- but so what? You don't seriously imagine when you stand on a peak that you are the first and will be the last ever to have been there. Lighten up.
My real objection is however to the overt fascism behind proposals to destroy hillside memorials - leave things alone. If it comforts people fine- if they are not maintained they will decay and disappear: if folk look after them they will remain. Why on earth should a plaque screwed into a piece of rock offend anyone?
Highlanders have tolerated a lot of things over the centuries- not the least of which are tourists in the form of mountaineers or neo-colonists in the guise of mountain rangers or employees of eco-quangos like the John Muir Trust or the National Trust. They should not seek to impose a set of values upon a landscape which does not spiritually belong to them.
Patrick Price says:
from Rab the Cairn Terrier (?): As for Fraser MacKenzie , he denigrates the "overt fascism" of proposals to remove memorials then goes on to dismiss mountaineers as "neo-colonialists" to whom the land "does not spiritually belong to" - how fascist is that? Is Scotland only for the Scots? The Highlands for the Highlanders? Fraser might like to spend his time in the hills seeking out monuments where he can commune with the spirits of his celtic ubermensch ancestors (or his hip flask), but does that mean the rest of us should have to tolerate brass plaques and commemorative cairns wherever we go?
Seriously though, if a memorial is of historical significance or commemorates a death or deaths at the place where the tragedy took place, they should be left well alone. On the other hand anything placed on a hill just because the deceased visited a couple of times and liked the view is both unnecessary and undesirable and shouldn't be encouraged. Providing you can square it with your conscience there is no harm in removing them either - just make sure first that Fraser isn't lurking behind the cairn armed with a shinty stick, or there might be a need for another plaque!
Nic Bullivant: Glyn Jones and Richard Spencer say so many things I agree with, there is little point reiterating them. However, we are not talking about hillside and roadside additions to an "empty" landscape. Empty is in the eye of the beholder. Who were the Fascists anyway? The majority of decent folk or a minority of selfish egotists? As a representative of a land owner I am far from happy to be accorded the sole arbitration on this matter. I could approve something truly awful because I think it would please my boss.
The illustrated memorial on Ben Ledi to Sgt Harry Lawrie is, in my view a dreadful intrusion on this fine hill. Why is it important that all those who don't know who Sgt Harry Lawrie was have to have his memorial thrust to our attention when we climb Ben Ledi, perhaps to pursue our own private thoughts and enjoy the mountain environment?
I would personally much rather have no memorials on the hills at all.
So what so we do with the ones we have? The usual response is nothing.
There are several old memorials to skiers on Cairngorm Estate. Older mountaineers will recall that Jean's Hut was a memorial, erected in Coire Cas and moved to Coire an Lochain when ski development overtook the need for it. Eventually it was itself removed as it contributed to the deaths of other mountaineers, and was, in any case, no fitting tribute to the original dedicatee, as it was a premier example of a rotting, filthy, insanitary Scottish bothy. The unfortunate family who lost sons as a result of their attempt to reach Jean's Hut in a storm made a generous bequest to the MCofS which allowed them to purchase Mill Cottage. Now that's a memorial I can live with. (In, nearly).
We have had several requests over the years for bereaved friends and relatives to spread the ashes of loved ones on Cairn Gorm. This is a symbolic act, connecting the memory of the living with a place special to the dead when they were alive. Individuals ashes are not kept separate by crematoria, only a sample is retained of all the ashes available at the time.
On one occasion, bereaved relatives were kindly helped by the driver of a piste grooming machine in windy whiteout conditions. Unfortunately, the wind was so strong, and conditions so severe when they arrived at the preferred spot that the relative with the urn just opened the window and tossed the ashes to the winds, to see most of them spread very quickly across the windscreen of the vehicle, there to be cleared by the windscreen wipers.
More seriously, the contents of urns are very different from everything they are spread upon. It is possible that at a very popular spot, repeated spreading of ashes could have an impact on the acidity and nutrient regime of a biologically important site. This has not happened, to my knowledge at Cairn Gorm, but when the ashes are poured into a little pile, as I have discovered, they could have the effect on the vegetation equivalent to a caustic burn. The reason I knew they were ashes was because the pile was graced with a memorial card.
Clearly for most people who spread ashes, the memorial is in their head, and that's surely the most important place for it to be.
I echo Richard's advice about not making the chosen spot too remote. Even if those leaving the memorial can expect years of fitness, many others who may wish to visit the spot might struggle to reach it, through the effects of advancing years. Apart from this, while the deceased may be blessed with hillgoers to carry forward their memory, there will also be non-hill-savvy friends and relatives who may try to visit the spot in conditions which would shock those who first chose it.
Finally, how about a list of summit memorials? Here are my first few.
Philip Hands: I am totally against the placing of memorials of any kind in the Scottish mountains.
The Scottish mountains are wild places and should remain free of such intrusions. The memorials are usually dedicated to those who appreciated and enjoyed these wild places so their relatives should also appreciate that present and future generations also want to enjoy these wild places in an unspoiled state.
I agree that these memorials are no more than unacceptable litter and furthermore, show a selfish attitude on the part of those who erect these towards the wilderness of the Scottish mountains.
Rab the Cairn Terrier again: In any event the vegetation won't suffer as much as I've seen it do from ski tows, railways, car parks, snack bars, souvenir shops and the like, so anyone working for the Cairngorm Chairlift Company (or whatever it calls itself these days) is on shaky ground commenting on ashes let alone memorials.
As for a list of summit memorials, I know someone already working on that, but there seem to be so many of the things around these days it will likely be a long time before it will be finalized and ready for publication.
Peter Kemp:
Noel Darlow: The fundamental question is: what place does private grief have in a public space?
Nic Bullivant again:
Jay: A fitting tribute to anyone who has died on a hill would be a donation to their local mountain rescue because they are the ones that will risk life and limb to save those that are in trouble and or bring down the body of those that have been lost.
Fair enough rant away at the likes of the JMT, NTS and local ranger services, but at least we can all provide another outlet for a memorial rather than a tacky bit of plastic drilled into the top of a hill.
David Coleman: The other 6 replies suggested that the issue was more complicated than 18 other correspondents suggested.
One point raised was 'When does a 'random' memorial, which I assume is a memorial erected as a sign of personal grief become a 'long-standing memorial' like the memorial to Bill Stuart? Fraser Mackenzie notes that there has been a Highland tradition of marking a place of sudden death with the erection of a cairn. Might the memorials that we seek to remove from tops of mountains be a 21st century form of that tradition? He also said that, 'Memorials cause me to reflect and give an interest to the journey.'
Duncan H, who has a friend whose death is commemorated by a cairn says 'I would feel uncomfortable to know it had been cleared.' Why might he feel that way? One suggestion is that the cairns means a great deal to Duncan H, representing something that a third party concerned with tidiness rather than grieving can not understand. To clear such a cairn away, might be to clear away a part of the person who built it.
These memorials are a way of grieving and I believe that nobody has the moral right to tell somebody how and where they should show their grief.
Nic Bullivant said 'Empty is in the eye of the beholder'. There is far too for my eyes to feast upon from the top of Lochnagar for them to engage with these small memorials. Something like these memorials might offend my eye is a very small price for me to pay if it eases somebody else's grief. Live and let live.
Robet Taylor:
DuncanW: So here's to the Last Lost Climber.
Fair well to the Last Lost Climber.
We'll miss the Last Lost Climber.
A glass to the Last Lost Climber.
Andrew Jenkins: There is no place for permanent memorials on the hills. The dead have no interest in how they're remembered; the memorials are for the living, just to satisfy an overly sentimental and mawkish personality-type.
People close to me have died, sometimes in the mountains, but I have no need to change the mountains in order to remember them, and think fondly about them. I would never want that for myself. When you're gone, the only worthwhile memorials are the memories in your friends' heads.
Peter C. Webster:
Mike Stuart: What I would like to know is why Mr Jones found it necessary to single out Bill Stuart's memorial stone on Lochnagar, why not talk about destroying memorials in general? Did he not think it would be very insensitive and might upset or offend Bill's family? In fact I think the Mountaineering Council of Scotland were very irresponsible in printing the article.
For the record, Bill Stuart was my father's brother. I first saw the memorial when I was nine or ten years old, and subsequent visits led to my love of the hills. I'm a keen hillwalker and have done around a hundred Munros over the years. The memorial is visited at least once a year and has been very well maintained over the last fifty-two years. It has been cleaned and re-pointed several times, and I have personally re-painted the lettering twice.
The family decided to add the plaque on the fiftieth anniversary of Bill's death. There were two reasons for doing this. The first was to mark the occasion, and secondly it was to provide some additional information to the many people who see it and perhaps wonder why the memorial is there. On the day we added the plaque there were three generations of Bill's family there.
I would just like Glyn Jones and the M C of S to know how very upsetting this article was to Bill's family. I still can't believe this was ever written, let alone published.
Jim Bruce: I have a particular interest in this memorial stone as I was the other climber with Bill that tragic day. Although I left Scotland many years ago I always visit the stone and think of Bill on any return visit. This stone was erected at a time when mountaineering accidents in Scotland were relatively rare and no one could have foreseen that this would cause controversy so many years later.
Incidentally the stone was crafted by Jim Robertson, a stone mason and member of the climbing community at that time, who four years later died in the Asian 'flu epidemic. Therefore the stone may well be of significance to his family also.
If an over-abundance of memorials has become a problem, surely a stone that has withstood the elements for so long and is now considered a landmark by many climbers should be left undisturbed.
Over fifty years have passed since that terrible moment when I felt the rope sever and watched Bill plummet to his death but he is not forgotten and I can only hope that this problem will be resolved and that the stone will remain intact.
Mike Stuart: Many people would appear to think that "true" climbers and hillwalkers abhor the idea of memorials on the hills, and that they think they are put there by people who "know nothing about mountains" etc.
If I can quote the late Tom Patey from his book "One Man's Mountains" (if you don't know who he was then I'm probably wasting my time here)
Quote: "It was a sad day for Lochnagar when, in August 1953, Bill Stuart fell to his death on Parallel Gully "B". Although his initial slip was a mere six feet, the rope sliced through on a sharp flake of rock and he fell all the way to the corrie floor. It was a cruel twist of fate to overtake such a brilliant young climber, and for many of the "faithful" it soured the love of the hills that they had shared with him. The numbers dwindled on the Saturday bus and the crags shed much of their glamour; the majority of the old brigade took to hill walking and ski-ing, where they could forget unhappy memories and still enjoy the camaraderie of the hills."
It was some of the "faithful" old brigade who took turns to carry the memorial stone up Lochnagar. It would seem the camaraderie of the hills has been lost over the years.
I would be very interested to read Glyn Jones' views on his comments now, and would love to know what he imagines those people who erected the memorial think of him.
Mary Mulholland (nee Stuart) Billy was one of five children, he attended Broomhill School - from there he won a Bursary to Robert Gordon's College (our Father and two other brothers went there on Bursaries) from there he went into the Army to do his National Service - after training he was posted to Germany - when demobbed he came home and went to work in the office of C.P.T. at Tullos - he also sat a Civil Service Exam and came out top - then came the tragedy of his death - so who knows where he would have ended up?? He lived for Friday nights when he would be away up to Lochnagar and we would not see him until Sunday night around 10.30-11pm.
On that fateful Sunday our Mother was on edge all day and as time went on she was out on the pavement looking for him - we eventually saw a group of chaps outside George Clark's house (a fellow climber) 3 doors away - then we saw Chesty Bruce walking towards us and then he came in and told us what had happened.
By the way that photograph of Billy was taken on Lochnagar and he was in his climbing gear also as to his "Stone" that was done by his friends "The Climbing Community" and I am almost sure they got permission to erect it there and also for the Memorial Service and the scattering of his ashes at the top of the Gully he fell from this was done by his brother Rev.John Stuart. Billy was not religious but someone told us he was heard to say "the higher you climb the nearer you get to God".
I also think Lochnagar has been desecrated - but not by my brother's Memorial - but by the roads cut into the hillsides, steps etc. also the inscription on the 'Stone' comes from the Poem/Song "Dark Lochnagar" by Lord Byron.
Jon Foote: My view is that generally old memorials should be left alone, like old cairns, but a line needs to be drawn and new ones are no more and no less than litter. Who is the vandal, the person who builds a new cairn or memorial, or the person who demolishes it? John Bruce's photo and comments are interesting, and I agree with him about the photo stuck to the stone.
I think it is up to those who want to make a change to a wild place to think very hard before doing so. I remember being furious about an unnecessary new bridge in the Lake District; time has taken the edge off my anger but the place will remain spoiled.
Attitudes to memorials in the hills have changed, and have to change, because of the numbers of people visiting those places, and the potential number of memorials. When Bill's memorial was planned a large proportion of visitors to Lochnagar will have known him. After 50 years, that is no longer the case. I would object to someone destroying the memorial, but I would really applaud friends and family if they moved it to a suitable valley location.
Janet Crook:
Alistair Beeley:
John Sinclair:
Oliver Francks: As for your advice, well the mountains are done for if they are left in your hands. Why do you list the legal considerations almost last? People have no right to erect memorials on other peoples land full stop and firstly! And what is this about scattering ashes on mountain tops. "From an ecological point of view this has a number of environmental advantages" is the gem of a sentence I can't believe I am reading as you go on to point out tentatively the disadvantages. Mountain tops are delicate ecosystems and scattering of nutrients and changes of pH are very detrimental. People shouldn't be scattering food or litter or anything else on Britain's mountains!
As for the rest, you'll have people planting eucalyptus in national parks!...
The only good idea is footpath repair work; three words in a page full of rubbish.
Leave only foot prints and if you can help it don't even leave those!
Alex Scott:
Sandy Slater:
Robert Craig: Maybe keep the Ring of Brogar, though? But nothing more recent.
Rab the Cairn Terrier again: Sandy's dead right about one thing though - by debating the finer points of memorials in the face of sustained assaults on the land by promoters of windfarms and megapylons we're all wasting energy barking up the wrong tree.
Sandy Slater:
Jerry Ubysz:
Ms Hamerton: We eventually found an alternative place to install a memorial bench in a nice location with the council's permission.
It can seem at the time to those left behind that nothing else will do for the memorial location but the place you first have your heart set on. However, we found once things had calmed down a little we were able to come up with another suitable location and respect other countryside users at the same time.
The problem is once someone has died there is an incredible amount to do and everything seems to have to be done in such a rush, especially everything around the funeral. Consequently, along with the overwhelming emotions and general exhaustion, there is little time available to think carefully about what the impact a memorial might have in the wrong place.
However, it is essential that we do so in order to protect and preserve our diminishing beauty spots and wild areas that our loved ones and we all love.
The hills we see now are not 'natural' or 'wild', they're the result of hundreds if not thousands of years of human use and abuse of them.
At the moment a far more pressing and potentially catastrophic threat to the appearance and ecology of the hills is global warming. Which leads me to an excellent point made by a contributor: the next MCofS hot debate should be about the environmental damage caused by thousands of walkers driving hundreds of thousands of miles to 'compleat' their rounds! We need a constructive rather than condemnatory response to this too - eg carshare website!
Gordon Henderson: Lets see some real use of 'Community Service Orders', and have them used to provide parties to restore the hill landscape - starting with these sad, pathethic memorials.
William McCullough:
Andrew Mallinson:
An anonymous correspondent:
Sue Channon:
Graham: Some may find them "tacky and obtrusive" but others stop to pause and think of others. If I feel the need to place a marker, small and hidden, to mark the favourite place of my father then why should I be deprived of that?
I'm sure the idea of adding a tree or repairing a footpath is all well and good for some but it's not for me and my family.
Before you ask, yes I am a climber and walker and was involved in Mountain Rescue for many years and I can honestly say that I have never been offended by memorials on the hill.
As to the memorial to Harry, the man gave his life to try and save others. It is not for me to say whether it is fitting or not but, would any of you be happier without people like him out and about on the hills?
If we take this argument to its conclusion we will be removing footpaths, bridges, bothies and the like before returning the hills to their so called natural state.
I give up.
Andrew Mallinson:
|
John Bruce, Edmonton, Canada:
[ Home] [ News]
[ Safety and Training] [ Access and Conservation] [ Sports Development] [ Council Matters]
[ Search] [ Info Service] [ Membership] [ Publications] [ Newsletters] [ Links]