How cathedrals changed in the 20th century as recorded in the CATH files, part 2
By Lizzie Hensman, Assistant Archivist
This blog is the second in a series looking at topics covered in the recently catalogued collection of papers created by the Cathedrals Advisory Commission. For the first post, which looked at changes in the design of the interior of cathedrals, see: https://monumentoffame.org/2023/07/28/our-cathedrals-are-not-museums-how-cathedrals-changed-in-the-20th-century-as-recorded-in-the-cath-files/
When you think of a cathedral, what do you imagine? Is it a quiet space for reflection and prayer? Are there tourists on guided tours? Do you have to pay to get in? Should there be a shop and if so can it be in the main building? Questions about the purpose of cathedrals and their role in secular and religious life had been asked before but you can particularly see them playing out around the country in the CATH files.
Tourists were not new to cathedrals in the 20th century. The railways built in the previous century had increased their numbers, causing some cathedrals to post notices explaining what sort of behaviour was considered acceptable. But what should cathedrals do to improve the experience of visitors? I love to visit cathedrals. They are magnificent structures of human design and engineering. I can’t imagine anyone seeing the west front of Wells Cathedral without being amazed by the craftsmanship of the medieval sculptors. Cathedrals have a unique place in our national history and here was an opportunity to show it.
Museums had long had important artefacts and artworks on display. Tombs and memorials show both the skill of the artist who made them and highlight influential men and women with connections to the cathedral. In some cases the memorial itself tells the story of the person buried there but in others some interpretation is required to inform he visitor of their achievements. This needed to be tasteful and subtle so as not to distract from the majesty of the setting. Guidebooks or guided tours could be used to provide information to visitors without cluttering the cathedral with labels. Or the treasures could be grouped together in an exhibition section of the cathedral. This section was normally established in a side chapel or otherwise enclosed part of the cathedral. In one cathedral, in order to prevent important architectural features from being hidden the cases were suspended from a frame. Unfortunately this design was removed as the swaying was considered dangerous for the objects being exhibited.
Another way of attracting visitors is through events. Gloucester, Hereford, and Worcester host what could be the longest running classical music festival in the world, the Three Choirs Festival. This put these three cathedrals at the heart of the musical life of their dioceses but created a need for suitable spaces for musicians to prepare for concerts. This can be seen in some of the redevelopment plans put before the Commission. Additionally, when Worcester Cathedral was considering options for chairs in the nave in 1970 it considered fitting semipermanent raked seating. This would have improved the view for concertgoers and allowed the seats to be easily set up and cleared away, without the need to transport hundreds of chairs or build cupboards to store them in. It would have also given worshippers at the back a good view during services. However, many people struggled to imagine attending a service with such a set up. The idea was shelved but it shows that the Dean and Chapter were thinking of the space as a concert venue as well as a cathedral.
These changes weren’t universally popular. Regular worshippers resented the intrusion that they caused on their peaceful spaces. Lois Lang-Sims, a volunteer at Canterbury Cathedral, believed that the experience offered to tourists had too little to do with religion. She had a nine-point plan for improving the welcome given to tourists as set out in her self-published book Canterbury Cathedral: What are we going to do about it? (1981). She was also vehemently opposed to charging for entry to the main cathedral building.
Yet tourists presented an opportunity. No cathedral charges for people to attend services, you can’t put a price on access to God. But you can put a price on beautiful artworks and architecture. Some cathedrals were charging for entry in the Victorian period but most started considering it in the 20th century. The argument in support is that at the end of a church service the donation plate is handed around. There is an expectation that parishioners will contribute to the upkeep of the building that they use. People visiting the cathedral have an enjoyable day out and most visitors can afford to pay for this. Discussions about the ethics of these decisions can be found scattered throughout the files. The differences in opinion can still be seen today with cathedrals around the country having different approaches to charging for access to parts of their buildings.
Another way of making money from tourists was by selling them things. Up and down the country cathedral cafes and shops were being created. This meant there was a need for toilets to be extended and car parks enlarged. In most of these developments the Cathedrals Advisory Commission was consulted so the plans can be found in these files. Sometimes this meant building a whole new visitor centre as was proposed at Canterbury but in other cathedrals pre-existing buildings were converted. The Cloisters at Peterborough Cathedral were suggested as an alternate location for the bookshop to allow it to be moved from the nave. New buildings offered a blank slate. Rooms could be designed to match the needs of the cathedral and there was no risk of damaging a previously unknown wall painting. However, they would need to be fitted in to the precincts of the cathedral in a sympathetic way. Converting an underutilised space was normally cheaper and meant that the external appearance of the cathedral was preserved. As I’m sure you can imagine both options had proponents and detractors on the Commission.
All of these changes increased the income of cathedrals. This was vital both for repairing longstanding problems with the fabric and ones caused by modern use. Increased footfall is exactly that. It is more feet walking over the gravestones and memorials in the floor, more hands being run along walls, more excitable children wobbling stones. This raised questions about how best to protect and restore these features. In 1977 a conference was held by the Council for British Archaeology about the impact of visitors on Canterbury Cathedral as on a peak day the visitor numbers could exceed the population of the city (30,000). They discussed the importance of recording the archaeology of cathedrals and changes that could be made to the use of the precincts which would reduce future damage.
It wasn’t just the increase in tourism which increased the cost of maintenance. For example in York, development of the city lowered the water table making the structure of the Minster unstable. Increased pollution from cars sped up the rate of stone decay. It was unknown if sonic booms from supersonic aircraft would damage the spires. Cathedral architects had to be at the cutting edge of scientific development to ensure that the buildings in their care received the best treatments. There will be more on that topic in a later post. Throughout the CATH files you can see evidence of Deans, Chapters and members of the Commission discussing the purpose of cathedrals. A key theme was how to balance their role as the religious centre of a diocese while adapting to an increasingly secular society which saw them as tourist and community attractions, and facilitators of art and cultural events.
A Monument of Fame 