Hubbry Logo
London StoneLondon StoneMain
Open search
London Stone
Community hub
London Stone
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
London Stone
London Stone
from Wikipedia

London Stone on temporary display at the Museum of London in 2018
London Stone in its 2018 casing

London Stone is a historic landmark housed at 111 Cannon Street in the City of London.[1] It is an irregular block of oolitic limestone measuring 53 × 43 × 30 cm (21 × 17 × 12"), the remnant of a once much larger object that had stood for many centuries on the south side of the street.

The name "London Stone" was first recorded around the year 1100. The date and original purpose of the stone are unknown, although it is possibly of Roman origin. There has been interest and speculation about it since the medieval period, but modern claims that it was formerly an object of veneration, or has some occult significance, are unsubstantiated.

Description

[edit]

The present London Stone is only the upper portion of a once much larger object. The surviving portion is a block of oolitic limestone approximately 53 cm wide, 43 cm high, and 30 cm front to back (21 × 17 × 12 inches).[2] A study in the 1960s indicated that the stone is Clipsham limestone, a good-quality stone from Rutland transported to London for building purposes in both the Roman and medieval periods.[3] More recently, Kevin Hayward has suggested that it may be Bath stone, the stone most used for monuments and sculpture in early Roman London and in Saxon times.[4]

The stone is located on the north side of Cannon Street, opposite Cannon Street station, in an aperture in the wall of 111 Cannon Street (EC4N 5AR), within a Portland stone casing.

History

[edit]
London Stone and St Swithin's Church as shown on the "Copperplate" map of c. 1553–1559

When London Stone was erected and what its original function was are unknown, although there has been much speculation.

The stone was originally located on the south side of medieval Candlewick Street (afterward widened to create modern Cannon Street), opposite the west end of St Swithin's Church. It is shown in this position on the Copperplate map of London, dating to the 1550s,[5] and also appears on the derivative "Woodcut" map of the 1560s. It was described by the London historian John Stow in his Survey of London (1598) as "a great stone called London stone", "pitched upright ... fixed in the ground verie deep, fastened with bars of iron".[6]

Stow does not give the dimensions of this "great stone", but a French visitor to London in 1578 had recorded that the stone was three feet high (above ground), two feet wide, and one foot thick (90 × 60 × 30 cm).[7] Thus, although it was a local landmark, the part of it standing above ground was not particularly large.

Middle Ages

[edit]

The earliest reference to the stone is usually said to be that in a medieval document cited by Stow in 1598. He refers to an early list of properties in London belonging to Christ Church, Canterbury (Canterbury Cathedral), and says that one piece of land was described as lying "neare unto London stone".[6] Stow claims that the list had been bound into the end of a Gospel Book given to the cathedral by "Ethelstane king of the west Saxons", usually identified as Æthelstan, king of England (924–939). However, it is impossible to confirm Stow's account, since the document he saw cannot now be identified with certainty. Nevertheless, the earliest extant list of Canterbury's London properties, which has been dated to between 1098 and 1108, does refer to a property given to the cathedral by a man named "Eadwaker æt lundene stane" ("Eadwaker at London Stone").[8] Although not bound into a Gospel Book (it is now bound into a volume of miscellaneous medieval texts with a Canterbury provenance (MS Cotton Faustina B. vi) in the British Library), it could be that it was this, or a similar text, that Stow saw.[9]

Sir Christopher Wren's rebuilt St Swithin's Church in 1831, with the casing of the London Stone visible at ground level beneath the central window. The church was demolished in 1962 after wartime bombing.

Like Eadwaker, other medieval Londoners acquired or adopted the byname "at London Stone" or "of London Stone" because they lived nearby. One of these was "Ailwin of London Stone", the father of Henry Fitz-Ailwin de Londonestone, the first Mayor of the City of London, who took office some time between 1189 and 1193, and governed the city until his death in 1212. The Fitz-Ailwin house stood away from Candlewick Street, on the north side of St Swithin's church.[9]

London Stone was a well-known landmark in medieval London, and when in 1450 Jack Cade, leader of a rebellion against the corrupt government of Henry VI, entered the city with his men, he struck his sword on London Stone and claimed to be "Lord of this city".[10] Contemporary accounts give no clue as to Cade's motivation, or how his followers or the Londoners would have interpreted his action. There is nothing to suggest he was carrying out a traditional ceremony or custom.

London Stone in its 1742 setting
The stone behind its 1869 grille: an engraving by Gustave Doré, 1872

16th and 17th centuries

[edit]

By the time of Queen Elizabeth I London Stone was not merely a landmark, shown and named on maps, but a visitor attraction in its own right. Tourists may have been told variously that it had stood there since before the city existed, or that it had been set up by order of King Lud, legendary rebuilder of London, or that it marked the centre of the city, or that it was "set [up] for the tendering and making of payment by debtors".[6][7][11]

It appears to have been routinely used in this period as a location for the posting and promulgation of a variety of bills, notices, and advertisements.[12] In 1608 it was listed in a poem by Samuel Rowlands as one of the "sights" of London (perhaps the first time the word was used in that sense) shown to "an honest Country foole" on a visit to town.[13][14]

During the 17th century the stone continued be used as an "address", to identify a locality. Thus, for example, Thomas Heywood's biography of Queen Elizabeth I, Englands Elizabeth (1631), was, according to its title page, "printed by Iohn Beale, for Phillip Waterhouse; and are to be sold at his shop at St Pauls Head, neere London stone"; and the English Short Title Catalogue lists over 30 books published between 1629 and the 1670s with similar references to London Stone in the imprint.[15]

In 1671 the Worshipful Company of Spectacle Makers broke up a batch of substandard spectacles on London Stone:

Two and twenty dozen [= 264] of English spectacles, all very badd both in the glasse and frames not fitt to be put on sale ... were found badd and deceitful and by judgement of the Court condemned to be broken, defaced and spoyled both glasse and frame the which judgement was executed accordingly in Canning [Cannon] Street on the remayning parte of London Stone where the same were with a hammer broken in all pieces.[16][17]

The reference to "the remayning parte of London Stone" may suggest that it had been damaged and reduced in size, perhaps in the Great Fire of London five years earlier, which had destroyed St Swithin's church and the neighbouring buildings; it was later covered with a small stone cupola to protect it.[18]

18th century to early 20th century

[edit]
Demolition of St Swithin's church, 1962: the casing containing London Stone is still in the wall.

In 1598 John Stow had commented that "if carts do run against it through negligence, the wheels be broken, and the stone itself unshaken",[6] and by 1742 it was considered an obstruction to traffic. The remaining part of the stone was then moved, with its protective cupola, from the south side of the street to the north side, where it was first set beside the door of St Swithin's Church, which had been rebuilt by Christopher Wren after its destruction in the Great Fire. It was moved again in 1798 to the east end of the church's south wall, and finally in the 1820s set in an alcove in the centre of the wall within a solidly built stone frame set on a plinth, with a circular aperture through which the stone itself could be seen. In 1869 the London and Middlesex Archaeological Society arranged for the installation of a protective iron grille and an explanatory inscription in Latin and English on the church wall above it.[19]

During the 19th and 20th centuries the London Stone was regularly referred to in popular London histories and guidebooks, and visited by tourists; during his stay in England in the 1850s the American author Nathaniel Hawthorne recorded a visit to London Stone in his journal, noting the indentations on the top "which are said to have been made by Jack Cade's sword".[20] In 1937 Arthur Mee, the founder of The Children's Newspaper and author of The King's England series of guidebooks, described it as "a fragment of its old self [...] said by some to have been a stone set up in Stone Age days".[21]

The archaeologist George Byron Gordon was more expansive (and fanciful) in the course of his Rambles in Old London, published in 1924. He described London Stone as "the very oldest object in London streets" and "an object of great antiquity when the Romans arrived and their predecessors the ancient Britons found it on their arrival more than two thousand years before. It was erected by the people of the New Stone Age".[22]

1940 to present

[edit]
111 Cannon Street and London Stone in 2012. The ground floor was occupied by a branch of WHSmith.
London Stone, seen through its protective grille, 2004

In 1940 St Swithin's church was burnt out by bombing in the Blitz. However, the outer walls remained standing for many years, with London Stone still in its place in the south wall. In 1962 the remains of the church were demolished, and replaced by an office building, 111 Cannon Street, which originally housed the Bank of China; London Stone was placed without ceremony in a specially constructed Portland stone alcove, glazed and guarded with an iron grille, in the new building.[4] Inside the building it was protected by a glass case. The stone and its surround, including the iron grille, were designated a Grade II* listed structure on 5 June 1972.[1]

In the early 21st century the office building was scheduled for redevelopment, and in October 2011 the then landowners proposed to move the stone to a new location further to the west. Objections were raised by, among others, the Victorian Society and English Heritage, and the proposal was rejected by the City of London Corporation.[23][24]

Until February 2016 the ground floor of the building was occupied by a branch of WHSmith newsagents.[25] Inside the shop London Stone in its glass case was hidden behind a magazine rack and not usually accessible. In March 2016, planning permission was granted to allow the building to be demolished and replaced by a new one. The stone was put on temporary display at the Museum of London while the building works were carried out.[26][27][28] It was returned to Cannon Street in October 2018. The new premises publicly display London Stone on a plinth, within a Portland stone casing loosely inspired by its 19th–century predecessor, and behind glass. The plaque adjacent to the stone reads

London Stone

The remaining part of London Stone, which once stood in the middle of Cannon Street, slightly west of its present location. Its original purpose is unknown, although it may be Roman and related to Roman buildings that lay to the south. It was already called 'London Stone' in the 12th century and became an important city landmark. In 1450 Jack Cade, leader of the rebellion against the corrupt government of Henry VI, struck it with his sword and claimed to be Lord of London.

In 1742, London Stone was moved to the north side of the street and eventually set in an alcove in the wall of St Swithin's church on this site.

The church was bombed in the Second World War and demolished in 1961–1962, and London Stone was incorporated into a new office building on the site. Following redevelopment it was placed in its present location in 2018.

Interpretations

[edit]

14th century

[edit]

The Short English Metrical Chronicle, an anonymous history of England in verse composed in about the 1330s, which survives in several variant recensions (including one in the so-called Auchinleck manuscript), includes the statement that "Brut sett Londen ston" – that is to say, that Brutus of Troy, the legendary founder of London, set up London Stone.[29][30] This claim suggests that interest in the stone's origin and significance already existed. However, the story does not seem to have circulated widely elsewhere, and was not repeated in other chronicles.

16th century

[edit]

In 1598 the London historian John Stow admitted that "The cause why this stone was set there, the time when, or other memory hereof, is none".[6] However, his contemporary William Camden, in his Britannia of 1586, concluded that it was a Roman milliarium, a central stone from which all distances in Roman Britain were measured, and similar to the Milliarium Aureum of Rome.[31] This identification remains popular, although there is no archaeological evidence to support it.[32]

18th century

[edit]

Alternatively, writers in the 18th century speculated that the stone was prehistoric and had been an object of Druidic worship.[33] Although this suggestion is now generally dismissed, it was revived in 1914 by Elizabeth Gordon in an unorthodox book on the archaeology of prehistoric London. She envisaged London Stone as an ancient British "index stone" pointing to a great Druidic stone circle, similar to Stonehenge, and claimed it had once stood on the site of St Paul's.[34] As noted above, in 1924 American archaeologist George Byron Gordon claimed a "New Stone Age" date for it, but such claims do not find favour with modern archaeologists, since there is no evidence.[32]

19th century

[edit]

By the early 19th century, a number of writers had suggested that London Stone was once regarded as London's "Palladium", a talismanic monument in which, like the original Palladium of Troy, the city's safety and wellbeing were embodied.[35] This view seemed to be confirmed when a pseudonymous contributor to the journal Notes and Queries in 1862 quoted a supposedly ancient proverb about London Stone to the effect that "So long as the Stone of Brutus is safe, so long shall London flourish".[36]

This verse, if it were genuine, would link London Stone to Brutus of Troy, as well as confirming its role as a Palladium. However, the writer in Notes and Queries was identified as Richard Williams Morgan, an eccentric Welsh clergyman. In an earlier book, Morgan had claimed that the legendary Brutus was a historical figure; London Stone, he wrote, had been the plinth on which the original Trojan Palladium had stood, and was brought to Britain by Brutus and set up as the altar stone of the Temple of Diana in his new capital city of Trinovantum or "New Troy" (i.e. London).[37] This story, and the verse about the "Stone of Brutus", can be found nowhere any earlier than in Morgan's writings, and both are probably his own invention. Although London Stone had been associated with Brutus in the 14th century, that tradition had never reached print, and there is nothing to indicate that Morgan had encountered it.[38] The spurious verse is still frequently quoted, but there is no evidence that London's safety has ever traditionally been linked to that of London Stone.[39]

In 1881 Henry Charles Coote argued that London Stone's name and reputation arose simply because it was the last remaining fragment of the house of Henry Fitz-Ailwin of London Stone (c. 1135–1212), London's first Mayor, although London Stone was mentioned about 100 years before Henry's time, and the Fitz-Ailwin house was some distance from the stone on the other side of St Swithin's church.[40][41]

In 1890 the folklorist and London historian George Laurence Gomme proposed that London Stone was the city's original "fetish stone", erected when the first prehistoric settlement was founded on the site and treated as sacred ever after.[42] Later, folklorist Lewis Spence combined this theory with Morgan's story of the "Stone of Brutus" to speculate about the pre-Roman origins of London in a 1937 book.[43][44]

20th and 21st centuries

[edit]
The known floorplan of the presumed "governor's palace"

By the 1960s, archaeologists had noted that in its original location London Stone would have been aligned on the centre of a large Roman building, probably an administrative building, now known to have lain in the area of Cannon Street station. This has been tentatively identified as a praetorium, even the local "governor's palace". It has further been suggested – originally by the archaeologist Peter Marsden, who excavated there from 1961–1972 – that the stone may have formed part of its main entrance or gate.[45][46] This "praetorium gate theory", while impossible to prove, is the prevailing one among modern experts.[47]

London Stone has been identified as a "mark-stone" on several ley lines passing through central London.[48][49] It has also entered the psychogeographical writings of Iain Sinclair as an essential element in London's "sacred geometry".[50][26]

There are two recent additions to the mythology surrounding London Stone. The first claims that John Dee – astrologer, occultist and adviser to Queen Elizabeth I – "was fascinated by the supposed powers of the London Stone and lived close to it for a while" and may have chipped pieces off it for alchemical experiments; the second that a legend identifies it as the stone from which King Arthur pulled the sword to reveal that he was rightful king. Both these "legends" seem first to be recorded in 2002.[51][citation needed] The first may have been inspired by the fictionalised John Dee of Peter Ackroyd's 1993 novel The House of Doctor Dee (see In literature below).

In literature

[edit]

15th to 19th centuries

[edit]
Jack Cade on London Stone, from Henry VI, Part 2. Illustration by Sir John Gilbert to The Works of William Shakespeare, 1881

So familiar was London Stone to Londoners that from an early date it features in London literature and in stories set in London. Thus, in an often reprinted anonymous satirical poem of the early 15th century, "London Lickpenny" (sometimes attributed to John Lydgate), the protagonist, lost and bewildered, passes London Stone during his wanderings through the city streets:

Then went I forth by London Stone
Thrwgheout all Canywike Strete ...[52]

In about 1522 a pamphlet was published by the London printer Wynkyn de Worde.[53] It comprised two anonymous humorous poems, the second of which, The Maryage ..., just two pages in length, purports to be an invitation to the forthcoming wedding between London Stone and the "Bosse of Billingsgate", a water fountain near Billingsgate erected or renovated in the 1420s under the terms of the will of the mayor Richard Whittington.[54] Guests are invited to watch the couple dancing – "It wolde do you good to see them daunce and playe." The text, however, goes on to suggest that both London Stone and the Bosse were known for their steadfastness and reliability.

London Stone also features in a tract The Returne of the renowned Caualiero Pasquill of England ... published in 1589.[55][12] Otherwise known as Pasquill and Marforius it was one of three that were printed under the pseudonym of the Cavaliero Pasquill, and contributed to the Marprelate controversy, a war of words between the Church of England establishment and its critics. At the end of this short work, Pasquill declares his intention of posting a notice on London Stone, inviting all critics of his opponent, the similarly pseudonymous Martin Marprelate, to write out their complaints and stick them up on the stone. Some writers have argued that this fictional episode proves that London Stone was a traditional place for making official proclamations.[43][56]

The Jack Cade episode was dramatised in William Shakespeare's Henry VI, Part 2 (act 4, scene 6), first performed c. 1591–2. In Shakespeare's elaborated version of the event, Cade strikes London Stone with a staff rather than a sword, then seats himself upon the stone as if on a throne, to issue decrees and dispense rough justice to a follower who displeases him.[57]

In 1598, London Stone was again brought to the stage, in William Haughton's comedy Englishmen for My Money, when three foreigners, being led about on stage through the supposedly pitch-black night-time streets of London, blunder into it.[58]

Later, London Stone was to play an important but not always consistent role in the visionary writings of William Blake. Thus in Jerusalem: The Emanation of the Giant Albion, his long illustrated poem on engraved plates begun in 1804, London Stone is a Druidic altar, the site of bloody sacrifices. Alternatively in Jerusalem and in Milton a Poem it is the geographic centre of Golgonooza, Blake's mystical city of London; it is a place where justice is delivered, where Los sits to hear the voice of Jerusalem, and where Reuben sleeps.[59]

20th and 21st centuries

[edit]

Ray Nelson's science fiction novel Blake's Progress (1975), based on the writings of William Blake, featured an alternative history in which Cleopatra won the Battle of Actium and an Alexandrian Empire replaced the Roman Empire. In the alternate London, called Gogonooza, the London Stone is present, standing in front of a Temple of Isis.

In the last years of the 20th century and the early years of the 21st, the stone has made an increasing number of appearances in novels of imagination and urban fantasy.

  • In Peter Ackroyd's novel The House of Doctor Dee (1993), the character Dr. Dee, vaguely based upon the historical figure of the occultist John Dee, claims that London Stone is the last remnant above ground of a glorious antediluvian and now buried city of London that he is searching for.
  • London Stone appears as an embodiment of evil in Charlie Fletcher's trilogy for children Stoneheart (2006–2008).
  • It features in The Midnight Mayor (2010), Kate Griffin's second Matthew Swift novel about urban magic in London
  • It is also part of China Miéville's Kraken (2010),[26] in which it is the beating heart of London and the sports shop that (at the time Miéville was writing) housed it hides the headquarters of the "Londonmancers" who may know the whereabouts of the kraken stolen from the Natural History Museum.
  • The third of a series of fantasy novels for children The Nowhere Chronicles by Sarah Pinborough, writing as Sarah Silverwood, is entitled The London Stone (2012): "The London Stone has been stolen and the Dark King rules the Nowhere ..."
  • In Marie Brennan's Onyx Court series (2008–2011), the stone is part of the magical bond between the mortal Prince of the Stone and the fairie court beneath London.
  • The stone appears in several chapters of Edward Rutherfurd's novel, London (1997). In the second chapter we see it as the marker stone for all the roads in Roman Londinium, and also sitting beside the wall of the Governor's Palace as mentioned above as a hypothesis of its use or origin. It is seen again in the ninth chapter where the main family unit of the novel bring in the character of the foundling who is found propped up against it. It is one of the many central focus points in the novel that the author uses to tie the different time periods together.
  • The stone is a central focus of DC Comics Vertigo storyline called The Knowledge (2008), featuring John Constantine's sidekick Chas Chandler.[60]
  • The stone also appears many times in the Dark Fae FBI series (2017), by C.N. Crawford and Alex Rivers, in which it is the site of many ancient sacrifices and is used to channel memories and power.
  • The stone is mentioned in Nicci French's crime novel Tuesday's Gone (2013).
  • The stone and its surrounding area is mentioned in Jodi Taylor's short story Christmas Pie (2023).

See also

[edit]

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Historic England. "'London Stone' with stone surround and iron grille set into base of number 111 Cannon Street EC4 (Grade II*) (1286846)". National Heritage List for England. Retrieved 11 November 2018.
  2. ^ Clark 2007, p. 169.
  3. ^ Merrifield, Ralph (1965). The Roman City of London. London: Benn. pp. 123–124.
  4. ^ a b Clark 2007, p. 177.
  5. ^ Clark 2007, pp. 171–172.
  6. ^ a b c d e Stow, John (1908). Kingsford, C. L. (ed.). A Survey of London. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 224–225.
  7. ^ a b Grenade, L. (2014) [1578]. Keene, Derek; Archer, Ian (eds.). Les singularitez de Londres, noble, fameuse cité, capital du Royaume d'Angleterre: Ses antiquitez et premiers fondateurs [The Singularities of London, 1578] (in French and English). Vol. 175. London: London Topographical Society. pp. 103–104, 224. ISBN 978-0-902087-620.
  8. ^ Kissan, B. W. (1940). "An early list of London properties". Transactions of London and Middlesex Archaeological Society. new series. 8 (2): 57–69.
  9. ^ a b Clark 2007, p. 171.
  10. ^ Clark 2007, pp. 179–186.
  11. ^ Groos, G.W. (1981). The Diary of Baron Waldstein: A Traveller in Elizabethan England. London: Thames and Hudson. pp. 174–175.
  12. ^ a b Clark 2015.
  13. ^ Rowlands, Samuel (1608). "A straunge sighted Traveller". Humors Looking Glasse. London: William Ferebrand. sig. D3 recto.
  14. ^ Rowlands, Samuel (1872) [1608]. "A straunge sighted Traveller". Humors Looking Glasse. Hunterian Club. Vol. 2. Glasgow: Hunterian Club. p. 29.
  15. ^ "English Short Title Catalogue". London: British Library. Archived from the original on 26 September 2017. Retrieved 18 May 2013.
  16. ^ "Company History". Worshipful Company of Spectacle Makers. Archived from the original on 24 December 2013. Retrieved 21 December 2013.
  17. ^ Law, Frank W. (1977). The Worshipful Company of Spectacle Makers: A History. London: Worshipful Company of Spectacle Makers. p. 11.
  18. ^ Clark 2007, p. 173.
  19. ^ Clark 2007, pp. 173–176.
  20. ^ Hawthorne, Nathaniel (1941). Stewart, Randall (ed.). The English Notebooks: Based upon the original manuscripts in the Pierpont Morgan Library. New York / London: Modern Languages Association of America, Oxford University Press. p. 289.
  21. ^ Mee, Arthur (1937). London: Heart of the Empire and Wonder of the World. London: Hodder & Stoughton. p. 281.
  22. ^ Gordon, G. B. (1924). Rambles in Old London. London: John Lane. pp. 45–47.
  23. ^ City of London planning case file: Relocation of London Stone (Report). London: City of London. 20 October 2011. 11/00664/LBC. Archived from the original on 5 May 2013. Retrieved 14 March 2013 – via planning.cityoflondon.gov.uk.
  24. ^ "Objectors say Minerva unwise to move 'London Stone'". The Times. No. 70477. London. 24 January 2012. p. 16.
  25. ^ "Directory". All in London. Retrieved 27 March 2013.
  26. ^ a b c Higgins, Charlotte (12 March 2016). "Psychogeographers' landmark London Stone goes on show at last". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 14 March 2016.
  27. ^ Neilan, Catherine (10 May 2016). "Mythic London Stone is going on show at Museum of London as current home on Cannon Street is demolished". City AM. London. Retrieved 10 May 2016.
  28. ^ "Joyful things for Friday – the perambulating London Stone". Histories of Archaeology Research Network. 1 July 2016. Retrieved 5 July 2016.
  29. ^ Clark 2018.
  30. ^ Burnley, David; Wiggins, Alison, eds. (2003). "The Auchinleck Manuscript: The anonymous short English metrical chronicle". Edinburgh: National Library of Scotland. line 457. Retrieved 10 March 2020.
  31. ^ Camden, William (1607). Britannia (in Latin). London: G. Bishop & J. Norton. p. 304.
  32. ^ a b Clark 2007, p. 178.
  33. ^ Clark 2010, p. 42.
  34. ^ Gordon, E.O. (1914). Prehistoric London: Its Mounds and Circles. London: Elliot Stock. pp. 3–4.
  35. ^ Clark 2010, p. 43.
  36. ^ Mor Merrion (1862). "Stonehenge". Notes and Queries. 3rd series. 1: 3.
  37. ^ Morgan, R. W. (1857). The British Kymry or Britons of Cambria. Ruthin: Isaac Clarke. pp. 26–32.
  38. ^ Clark 2018, p. 178.
  39. ^ Clark 2010, pp. 45–52.
  40. ^ Coote, H. C. (1881). "London botes: A lost charter; the traditions of London Stone". Transactions of London and Middlesex Archaeological Society. 5: 282–292.
  41. ^ Clark 2010, p. 52.
  42. ^ Gomme, George Laurence (1890). The Village Community: With Special Reference to the Origin and Form of its Survivals in Britain. London: Walter Scott. pp. 218–219.
  43. ^ a b Spence, Lewis (1937). Legendary London: Early London in Tradition and History. London: Robert Hale. pp. 167–172.
  44. ^ Clark 2010, pp. 52–54.
  45. ^ Marsden, Peter (1975). "The excavation of a Roman palace site in London, 1961–1972". Transactions of London and Middlesex Archaeological Society. 26: 1–102, esp. 63–64.
  46. ^ "Londinium Today: London Stone". Collections research. Museum of London. Retrieved 13 March 2013.
  47. ^ Webb, Simon (2011). Life in Roman London. The History Press. pp. 142, 144, 154–155.
  48. ^ Clark 2010, pp. 54–55.
  49. ^ Street, Christopher E. (2010). London's Ley Lines: Pathways of Enlightenment. London: Earthstars Publishing. pp. 183–189. ISBN 9780951596746.
  50. ^ Sinclair, Iain (1997). Lights Out for the Territory. London: Granta. p. 116. ISBN 1862070091.
  51. ^ "The London Stone". h2g2. c. 2002. Archived from the original on 18 August 2004. Retrieved 13 March 2013.
  52. ^ Dean, James M., ed. (1996). "London Lickpenny". Medieval English Political Writings. Kalamazoo, MI: Medieval Institute Publications / Western Michigan University. pp. 222–225, esp. 224, lines 81–82. ISBN 1879288648.
  53. ^ Halliwell, J. O., ed. (1860). A Treatyse of a Galaunt, with the Maryage of the Fayre Pusell the Bosse of Byllyngesgate unto London Stone. London: Printed for the Editor.
  54. ^ Stow, John (1908). Kingsford, C. L. (ed.). A Survey of London. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 208.
  55. ^ Nashe, Thomas (1958). McKerrow, Ronald B. (ed.). The Works of Thomas Nashe. Vol. 1 (reprinted ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 65–103.
  56. ^ "London Stone". Chambers's Journal. 5th series (225): 231–232. 21 April 1888.
  57. ^ Clark 2007, pp. 180–181.
  58. ^ Stock, Angela (2004). "Stow's Survey and the London playwrights". In Gadd, Ian; Gillespie, Alexandra (eds.). John Stow (1525–1605) and the Making of the English Past. London: British Library. pp. 89–98, esp. 95. ISBN 0712348646.
  59. ^ Clark 2010, pp. 43–45.
  60. ^ "The Knowledge". Vertigo Comics. No. #1–5. DC Comics. 2008.

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia

is an irregular block of oolitic limestone, measuring approximately 53 × 43 × 30 centimetres, housed in a protective glass enclosure at 111 in the .
First recorded around 1100 CE and referenced in medieval documents as "Lundene Stane," it served as a tangible landmark for public proclamations, oaths, and administrative notices in the vicinity of what was once Candlewick Street (now ).
Its position near the site of a Roman governor's suggests possible ties to Roman-era structures, though no direct archaeological evidence confirms specific functions like a or ceremonial .
Geological tests conducted in 2016 by the Museum of London Archaeology indicate the stone's material likely originated from the , a source of oolitic limestone used in antiquity.
Despite unsubstantiated legends portraying it as a Druidic relic, the foundational stone of , or the mystical "heart of " whose disturbance portends the city's ruin—claims lacking empirical support—the stone's verified historical role underscores its status as a enduring civic symbol.
A notable episode occurred in 1450 during , when the Kentish leader struck the stone with his sword, proclaiming himself "" in a gesture of assumed authority.
The stone has endured multiple relocations amid urban changes, including incorporation into St. Swithin's Church after the Great Fire of 1666, further moves in the 18th and 19th centuries, temporary storage at the Museum of London from 2016 to 2018, and its reinstatement at in a purpose-built setting; it holds Grade II listed status since the 1970s.

Physical Description

Composition and Appearance

London Stone consists of , a formed from grains resembling fish roe. Geological tests performed in 2016 by the Museum of London Archaeology, utilizing petrographic analysis, indicate that the stone likely originates from oolitic limestone deposits in the , approximately 160 km west of London, rather than earlier proposed sources such as Rutland's Clipsham stone. This identification aligns with Roman-era importation patterns of Cotswold oolites for construction in . Visually, the stone presents as an irregular, compact block with a misshapen form, its surface weathered, cracked, pockmarked, and darkened to a grubby from prolonged exposure to urban , accumulation since , and natural erosion. The blackened exterior obscures much of the original pale, oolitic texture, rendering it unremarkable at first glance amid its protective enclosure.

Dimensions and Condition

The London Stone consists of an irregular block of oolitic limestone measuring approximately 53 cm in width, 43 cm in height, and 30 cm in depth. This represents the surviving portion of what was once a substantially larger object, as historical accounts from the late 16th century describe dimensions closer to 90 cm by 60 cm by 30 cm. The reduction in size is attributed to progressive weathering and erosion over centuries of exposure to atmospheric conditions, including rain, wind, and urban pollution in London. The stone's surface exhibits significant wear, with a pitted and irregular texture characteristic of prolonged environmental degradation, though no precise quantitative assessments of material loss have been publicly documented beyond visual and historical comparisons. Since the mid-20th century, efforts to mitigate further deterioration have included encasement behind protective iron grilles and, more recently, a secure enclosure at its current location on . As of 2020, the stone remains in stable condition within this modern protective housing, safeguarding it from direct elemental exposure while allowing viewing. Debates in 2016 regarding temporary relocation to the Museum of London for enhanced preservation ultimately preserved its on-site presence, reflecting ongoing commitments to its physical integrity amid urban development pressures.

Location and Preservation

Original and Historical Sites

The presumed original site of London Stone lies on the south side of what is now , near its gutter, potentially in the forecourt of a Roman-era building possibly associated with the provincial governor's , though its precise Roman provenance remains unverified beyond the material's oolitic limestone suggesting importation during that period. By at least 1100 CE, the stone was documented in this vicinity on Candlewick Street (the medieval precursor to ), forming a fixed integrated into the local street grid established post-886 under King Alfred. Historical records place it consistently opposite or adjacent to St. Swithin's Church on from the medieval period onward, with the (c. 1553–1559) illustrating its location near the church. In 1598, chronicler described it as a large upright stone approximately 3 feet (0.91 meters) above ground (with additional portions subterranean), secured by iron bars and embedded in the street pavement directly on . Following the in 1666, which destroyed much of the surrounding area including early iterations of St. Swithin's Church, the stone was repositioned adjacent to the church's door to mitigate obstruction from increasing traffic. Further adjustments occurred in the 18th and 19th centuries amid urban development and preservation efforts: in , it was shifted to the church door for safety from vehicles; relocated again in 1798 and during the 1820s to the south wall of the rebuilt St. Swithin's (designed by post-1666 fire); and by the mid-19th century, encased in an alcove with a protective iron grille and surround. The stone remained embedded in the base of St. Swithin's Church— a medieval foundation rebuilt multiple times—until the church's demolition after severe damage from bombing in 1941, after which it was temporarily stored before reincorporation into the site at 111 in 1962.

Modern Relocations and Protection Measures

In 2011, developer sought permission from the to relocate the stone from its position at 111 to an interior site within the proposed Walbrook Building for enhanced conservation amid redevelopment plans, but this faced opposition from heritage groups including , which argued the move would diminish its public accessibility and historical street-level context. The proposal ultimately did not proceed, preserving the stone's longstanding external placement. To facilitate demolition and reconstruction of the adjoining building at 111 , the stone was temporarily removed on 12 March 2016 and transferred to the Museum of London for conservation, scientific analysis, and public display, where it remained for over two years under controlled environmental conditions to mitigate deterioration from urban exposure. During this period, experts cleaned and stabilized the block, addressing accumulated grime and accumulated over decades behind its prior iron grille. Upon completion of the site works, the stone was reinstalled at 111 Cannon Street in early 2020, now encased in a transparent protective glass enclosure integrated into the facade to shield it from vehicular pollution, vandalism, and physical damage while allowing visibility and public interaction. This measure replaced the earlier 19th-century iron grille, offering superior preservation against modern environmental stressors such as acid rain and traffic emissions, as confirmed by post-relocation assessments emphasizing the stone's oolitic limestone vulnerability to erosion. Ongoing protection includes monitoring by the and periodic maintenance protocols, reflecting its status as a scheduled under UK heritage law, which mandates safeguards against unauthorized alteration or removal. These efforts balance accessibility with durability, ensuring the artifact's integrity amid Cannon Street's commercial density.

Verifiable Historical Record

Earliest Documented Mentions

The earliest verifiable written reference to London Stone appears in documents dating to between 1098 and 1108, where it is identified as a landmark known as "Londenstane" situated on the south side of Candlewick Street (now ) in the . This mention, preserved in medieval property records, positions the stone as a fixed point for legal and navigational purposes amid the densely built urban landscape. John Stow, in his 1598 Survey of London, cited an purportedly earlier 10th-century reference in a property inventory associated with Christ Church, Canterbury, describing the stone as a near properties owned by the priory; however, the original document lacks independent corroboration and may reflect Stow's interpretation of fragmented records rather than direct evidence. Subsequent early 12th-century charters reinforce its role as a civic reference, including a 1189 record naming Henry, son of Aylwin of Lundenstane, as London's first , implying the stone's established prominence in local nomenclature and governance by that time. These mentions underscore the stone's integration into Anglo-Norman administrative practices, where it served as a site for oaths, measurements, and proclamations, though no surviving primary texts predate the late with unambiguous detail. Earlier attributions, such as speculative links to the (1086) via the Ossulstone Hundred, derive from etymological associations rather than explicit references to the stone itself.

Medieval and Tudor Era Events

During in June 1450, the Kentish rebel leader, using the alias , entered London via and proceeded to the London Stone on Candlewick Street (now ). He struck the stone with his sword, proclaiming "Now Mortimer is lord of this city," in a symbolic assertion of authority that echoed the ceremonial touching of the stone by newly elected Lord Mayors. This act, recorded in contemporary chronicles such as Gregory's Chronicle, highlighted the stone's established role as a focal point for civic power and legitimacy in medieval London, though its precise symbolic significance remains debated among historians. In the broader medieval context, the London Stone functioned as a for public assemblies, measurements of , and official proclamations, with grooves on its surface possibly resulting from such practical uses. While later legends claimed it as a site for royal oaths or Druidic rituals, primary records substantiate only its integration into everyday urban administration and occasional dramatic political gestures like Cade's. No major incidents directly involving the London Stone are documented during the (1485–1603), though it persisted as a venerated antiquity. Chronicler referenced it in his 1598 Survey of London as an enduring emblem of the city's ancient foundations, situated near the church of St. Swithin. Its symbolic status influenced literary depictions, such as in Shakespeare's , where Cade's strike is dramatized, reflecting ongoing cultural memory of the 1450 event.

18th to 20th Century Documentation

In the early 18th century, London Stone was enclosed under a small stone cupola for protection, as recorded in contemporary surveys of the city's landmarks. By 1742, its position in the roadway had become a hazard to traffic on the narrow Cannon Street, prompting relocation to the north side of the street, where it was set into an alcove in the outer wall of St Swithin's Church, the Christopher Wren-rebuilt structure dedicated to the site since the Great Fire of 1666. Further adjustments occurred in 1798, when the stone was shifted slightly after the demolition of a protective casing or adjacent building, repositioning it more securely against the south wall of the churchyard while maintaining public access. accounts from the period, such as Thomas Pennant's Some Account of London (1790 edition), documented the stone's enduring presence and speculated on its talismanic role akin to ancient civic relics, though without empirical verification. Throughout the , the stone featured in archaeological and historical publications, including Edward Wedlake Brayley's Londiniana (1829 review in Gentleman's Magazine) and discussions in Transactions of the and Archaeological (1870, 1881), which cataloged its physical integration into the church facade amid urban development, such as nearby construction in the . By the , it had been encased in a dedicated alcove to preserve and prevent further from foot traffic. In the early , prior to , the stone remained a fixed civic marker, referenced in works like Charles R. Beard's Lucks and Talismans (1934) for its symbolic continuity. St Swithin's Church, with the stone embedded in its wall, endured until destruction by bombing during on 29 December 1940; the stone itself survived intact within the bombed-out shell, as noted in post-raid assessments of City church ruins.

Post-1945 Developments

The London Stone survived the bombing of St Swithin's Church during the Second World War Blitz, remaining intact within its protective alcove. In 1960, following the demolition of the church ruins, the stone was temporarily relocated to the Guildhall Museum for safekeeping amid post-war urban redevelopment. By 1962, it was reinstalled in a grilled and glazed alcove at 111 Cannon Street, integrated into a new office building that subsequently housed entities including the Bank of China. In 2011, proposals to relocate the stone permanently as part of site redevelopment sparked opposition from heritage groups, including , emphasizing its historical significance to the location. Redevelopment proceeded in 2016, necessitating another temporary move to the Museum of London, where the stone underwent conservation, material analysis, and public display for over two years. On October 4, 2018, the London Stone returned to 111 , now part of a contemporary retail and complex, encased in a transparent that enhanced visibility compared to prior gratings. This relocation preserved its traditional site while adapting to modern architectural demands, with the stone continuing to serve as a protected accessible to the public. As of 2025, it remains at 111 under ongoing custodial measures by the .

Archaeological and Scientific Evidence

Material Analysis and Sourcing

London Stone consists of oolitic limestone, a Jurassic-era featuring concentric layers of grains formed in shallow marine settings. This material type, measuring roughly 53 cm in height, 43 cm in width, and 30 cm in depth in its extant form, does not occur naturally in the London area, indicating transportation from distant quarries. Early geological assessments in the 1960s classified it as Clipsham limestone, derived from oolitic deposits spanning regions from Dorset to in eastern . Subsequent analysis in 2016 by the Museum of London Archaeology, involving comparative petrographic examination, suggested an alternative sourcing from Cotswold limestone beds approximately 160 km west of , based on textural and mineralogical matches. These findings underscore regional variability in oolites, where similar lithologies complicate precise provenance without advanced techniques like isotopic tracing or quarry-specific analysis, neither of which has been applied publicly to the stone. Such was quarried and utilized across Roman, Saxon, and early medieval Britain for monumental and functional purposes, consistent with the stone's proposed historical roles, though no direct quarry link or dating via scientific methods (e.g., or radiocarbon on associated organics) has confirmed its fabrication era. The absence of detailed elemental composition data—beyond its dominance—limits further insights into or alteration history, with preservation efforts focusing instead on physical protection rather than invasive sampling.

Evidence for Proposed Functions

Archaeological evidence points to London Stone's location on aligning closely with the administrative core of Roman , including proximity to the and forum excavated at sites like and , suggesting a potential role in official measurement or governance. Excavations in the area during the uncovered Roman building foundations and artifacts indicative of public structures, consistent with the stone serving as a base or marker for such facilities, though no direct physical linkage to the stone itself has been established. Proposals that the stone functioned as a Roman milliarium—a central from which distances across the province were measured, akin to the milliarium aureum in the —rely on its central urban placement and the 17th-century conjecture by , but lack supporting inscriptions, bronze plaques, or comparable artifacts found in Britain. Petrographic analysis confirming the stone's oolitic limestone composition matches materials used in Roman monumental architecture further permits this interpretation indirectly, yet the absence of mileage engravings or dedicatory text undermines claims of a metrological purpose. Alternative attributions link the stone to a or governor's residence gateway, drawing from nearby digs revealing substantial Roman masonry potentially tied to administrative complexes; for instance, excavations at the former St. Swithin's Church site exposed walls and tessellated floors compatible with elite Roman buildings. This view gains traction from the stone's dimensions (approximately 53 × 43 × 30 cm) and weathering patterns, which align with a reused architectural fragment rather than a standalone object, though stratigraphic tying it specifically to a remains inconclusive. Scientific examinations, including 2016 sourcing tests by Museum of London Archaeology attributing the limestone to Cotswold quarries—a key Roman supply—support its integration into imperial-era construction but provide no functional specificity, as the stone's surface erosion has obliterated any potential carvings or contextual clues. Overall, while positional and material data favor a Roman public or ceremonial utility over prehistoric or Druidic origins, definitive proof eludes current methodologies, with proposals resting on inference from broader layouts rather than the stone's isolated attributes.

Limitations of Current Knowledge

The precise geological provenance of the London Stone, identified as oolitic limestone, remains uncertain despite analyses suggesting origins in Rutland or similar Jurassic deposits exploited during the Roman period, as no quarry-specific markers or transport evidence have been traced. Lack of inscriptions, tooling marks, or contextual Roman artifacts prevents confirmation of its intended function, whether as a milestone, boundary marker, or structural element of a forum or basilica, leaving hypotheses reliant on circumstantial location near Londinium's civic center. Archaeological constraints arise from repeated relocations—first documented in the medieval period and continuing through 20th-century urban redevelopment—which have severed the stone from any original stratigraphic context, rendering in-situ excavation at the purported site infeasible amid modern infrastructure. Scientific methods such as petrographic analysis yield material composition but fail to establish deposition date or pre-Roman use, as the stone's inorganic nature precludes or other chronological techniques applicable to associated organics. John Clark, curator emeritus at the Museum of London, has emphasized that "science just can't explain it—this is one case where has failed," highlighting the evidentiary void filled by unverified legends rather than empirical data. Ongoing urban development priorities limit non-destructive testing opportunities, perpetuating gaps in understanding the stone's integration into Londinium's or potential significance, with no peer-reviewed studies resolving these ambiguities as of 2025.

Legends and Attributions

Ancient and Mythical Origins

One prominent legend traces the origins of to , a mythical descendant of who purportedly founded —originally called Troynovant or New Troy—around the after fleeing the fall of . In this narrative, Brutus transported the stone from and erected it as an upon which he sacrificed to the goddess Diana, seeking divine approval for his new settlement; a proverbial curse held that "so long as the stone of Brutus is safe, so long shall London flourish." This Brutus myth, rooted in medieval pseudo-histories like Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae (c. 1136), which fabricated a Trojan ancestry for Britain's kings to legitimize Norman rule, later fused with London Stone in folklore without direct ancient attestation. A separate ancient attribution casts the stone as a Druidic altar for human sacrifices predating Roman Londinium, evoking Iron Age Celtic rituals amid Britain's prehistoric landscape. This idea gained traction in Romantic-era interpretations, notably endorsed by William Blake, who invoked the stone's "Druid" blood-soaked history in prophetic works like Jerusalem (1804–1820) to symbolize London's primal, sacrificial essence. Both legends lack empirical support: geological analysis dates the oolitic limestone to quarries in exploited from Roman times onward, with no traces of prehistoric alteration or blood residues, rendering pre-Roman or extraterrestrial origins implausible.

Medieval to Early Modern Interpretations

In medieval , the was attributed to , the legendary founder of (then called New Troy), with a 14th-century metrical linking it to his establishment of the city and suggesting that London's prosperity depended on its preservation. This interpretation tied the stone to Britain's mythical Trojan origins, as popularized in Geoffrey of Monmouth's (c. 1136), though direct evidence connecting the physical stone to Brutus dates to later medieval texts rather than contemporary records. The stone served practical ceremonial functions in medieval London, functioning as a site for public proclamations, oaths, and official announcements, as referenced in city records and chronicles. Its role as a landmark for such acts is evidenced by its use in debt settlements and civic rituals, though primary sources like those compiled by indicate these were customary rather than divinely mandated. A pivotal event underscoring its perceived symbolic importance occurred on July 3, 1450, when Jack Cade, leader of a rebellion against King Henry VI, struck the stone with his sword and declared himself "Lord of this city" (or "Mortimer lord of London" in some accounts). Contemporary chronicles, including those by Robert Fabyan and Edward Hall, record this act, interpreting it as a claim to over London, though historians debate whether it reflected established tradition or improvised theater, as no prior medieval evidence confirms the stone as a formal seat of power. In the , interpretations shifted toward historical and antiquarian views, with William Camden's (1607) proposing it as a Roman milliarium—a central from which distances were measured—based on its location and material, aligning with emerging interest in over mythic origins. John Stow's Survey of London (1598) reinforced its status as an ancient relic integral to the city's identity, documenting its embedding in church walls and continued use for proclamations amid Tudor urban changes. These accounts reflect a transition from legendary to verifiable historical artifact, though without resolving its precise ancient function.

19th to 21st Century Speculations

In the , renewed interest in spiritualism and antiquarianism led to speculations portraying the as a or protective of prehistoric origin, despite lacking archaeological support. Folklorist Alice B. Gomme contributed to the notion of it as the "heart of London," embedding it in romanticized urban mythology that emphasized symbolic rather than evidentiary significance. A purported "ancient prophecy" published in 1862 linked the stone explicitly to , London's mythical founder, claiming the city's destruction would follow if the stone were harmed or removed; this narrative, lacking pre-19th-century attestation, amplified earlier medieval tropes into modern . Early 20th-century interpretations, influenced by emerging and interests, recast the stone as a fetish object or multivalent symbol embodying London's , with anthropologist Lewis Spence in 1937 reinforcing its role as a mystical core tied to ley lines and ancient earth energies, though without empirical validation. Archaeological findings from Roman Londinium excavations prompted more grounded theories, such as Peter Marsden's proposal in his 1980 work Roman London that the stone formed part of the provincial governor's palace gateway, based on proximity to known Roman structures and the stone's oolitic composition consistent with regional Roman sourcing. These views contrasted with persistent mythic attributions, including unsubstantiated claims of Druidic sacrificial use originating from William Blake's earlier visions but echoed in antiquarian writings. In the late 20th and 21st centuries, material analyses refined sourcing to Jurassic limestone from areas like the or Clipsham, supporting Roman-era use but not resolving function, with 1960s studies identifying Clipsham origins and 2016 Museum of London Archaeology tests favoring Cotswold provenance. Speculations diversified into pseudohistorical links, such as a modern variant tying it to King Arthur's sword-extraction myth, absent from pre-20th-century sources and dismissed by historians for . Contemporary literature and online discourse perpetuate talismanic interpretations, often invoking Jack Cade's 1450 striking as symbolic precedent, yet scholarly consensus, as articulated by Museum of London curators, underscores evidential gaps, attributing enduring allure to cultural projection rather than verifiable antiquity.

Cultural and Symbolic Significance

References in Literature

One prominent literary reference to the London Stone occurs in William Shakespeare's Henry VI, Part 2 (c. 1591), Act 4, Scene 6, where the rebel Jack Cade enters London, strikes his staff on the stone, and declares, "Now is Mortimer lord of this city," claiming authority over the capital. This scene dramatizes the historical 1450 rebellion, amplifying the stone's symbolic role as a site of power assertion. In the early 19th century, William Blake incorporated the London Stone into his illuminated prophetic book Jerusalem (1804–1820), portraying it as a locus of ancient Druidic rituals, including human sacrifice with a "Druids' golden Knife / Rioted in human gore." Blake's mythic interpretation linked the stone to pre-Christian pagan practices, embedding it within his visionary critique of historical and spiritual continuity in Britain. Rudyard Kipling referenced the stone in his 1923 poem "London Stone," published on the eve of the fifth anniversary, framing it as a memorial site for the war dead: "When you come to London Town, (Grieving—grieving!) / Bring your flowers and lay them down / At the place of grieving." The work evokes the stone's enduring presence amid collective mourning, tying it to national remembrance without invoking legends.

Role in Folklore and National Identity

In , the London Stone is depicted as a talismanic object central to the city's fate, with legends asserting that its preservation guarantees London's prosperity. A key , "So long as the Stone of Brutus is safe, so long shall London flourish," ties the relic to Brutus, the mythical Trojan exile credited with founding London (originally Troynovant) after the fall of around 1100 BCE in medieval chronicles like Geoffrey of Monmouth's . This association positions the Stone as a fetish or sacred marker of divine favor, akin to coronation stones in other national myths, though scholarly analysis traces the 's earliest attestation to the , suggesting it as a romantic invention rather than an ancient tradition. The Stone's folklore gained historical notoriety during in 1450, when the Kentish rebel leader, upon entering the city on July 3, struck the Stone with his sword and proclaimed himself "" or "Lord of the City," invoking its purported authority to legitimize his rule amid grievances against Henry VI's government. This act, recorded in contemporary chronicles such as the Chronicle of London, reinforced the Stone's role as a symbolic seat of power, where possession allegedly conferred dominion over London, blending with during medieval uprisings. Beyond local lore, the London Stone contributes to by embodying myths of ancient continuity and resilience, linking the capital's origins to Trojan heritage—a narrative that medieval historians used to assert Britain's parity with classical empires and underpin royal legitimacy. This Trojan-British genealogy, echoed in works like William Blake's poetry referencing the Stone as a prophetic , fosters a sense of primordial endurance against invasion and decay, paralleling other national symbols like the in Scottish lore. Such traditions, while unsubstantiated archaeologically, have sustained the Stone's cultural reverence, portraying as the eternal heart of the realm amid historical upheavals, including its protection during in 1940.

Contemporary Cultural Impact

In the early , London Stone experienced renewed public attention through relocation and exhibition efforts prompted by urban development. In 2011, the stone was removed from its longstanding position at 111 due to the demolition of the adjacent building, sparking discussions on its preservation. It was subsequently displayed at the Museum of London starting in March 2016, marking its first major public exhibition in modern times and drawing psychogeographers and history enthusiasts to explore its mythic associations. The stone's return to in a new protective enclosure by late facilitated ongoing access, integrating it into the City's contemporary landscape while safeguarding it from environmental damage. This relocation underscored its symbolic role as a tangible link to London's ancient past, with media coverage in outlets like the Smithsonian highlighting persistent legends of it as the city's talismanic "heart." As a , London Stone attracts visitors interested in urban mysteries, featured in walking tours and online guides that emphasize its unexplained origins over verified Roman-era provenance. Platforms such as Atlas Obscura describe it as a site where historical speculation endures, with annual visitor reviews noting its allure despite modest appearance—averaging 3.3 out of 5 stars from 23 assessments as of 2025. Contemporary cultural discourse, including podcasts and articles, perpetuates unverified claims of significance, though archaeological evidence limits it to likely a utilitarian Roman .

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.