The Edinburgh Graveyards Project A scoping study to identify strategic priorities for the future care and enjoyment of !ve historic burial grounds in the heart of the Edinburgh World Heritage Site
Greyfriar’s Kirkyard, Monument No.22 George Foulis of Ravelston and Jonet Bannatyne (c.1633)
Report Author DR SUSAN BUCKHAM
Other Contributors THOMAS ASHLEY DR JONATHAN FOYLE KIRSTEN MCKEE DOROTHY MARSH ADAM WILKINSON
Project Manager DAVID GUNDRY
February 2013
1 Acknowledgements his project, and World Monuments Fund’s contribution to it, was made possi- ble as a result of a grant from The Paul Mellon Estate. This was supplemented Tby additional funding and gifts in kind from Edinburgh World Heritage Trust. The scoping study was led by Dr Susan Buckham of Kirkyard Consulting, a spe- cialist with over 15 years experience in graveyard research and conservation. Kirsten Carter McKee, a doctoral candidate in the Department of Architecture at Edinburgh University researching the cultural, political, and social signi!cance of Calton Hill, undertook the desktop survey and contributed to the Greyfriars exit poll data col- lection. Thomas Ashley, a doctoral candidate at Yale University, was awarded the Edinburgh Graveyard Scholarship 2011 by World Monuments Fund. This discrete project ran between July and September 2011 and was supervised by Kirsten Carter McKee. Special thanks also go to the community members and Kirk Session Elders who gave their time and knowledge so generously and to project volunteers David Fid- dimore, Bob Reinhardt and Tan Yuk Hong Ian. The project management team was composed of David Gundry, Projects Direc- tor at World Monuments Fund Britain; Adam Wilkinson, Director of Edinburgh World Heritage; and Dorothy Marsh, former Senior Conservation O"cer at the City of Edinburgh Council (retired from post April 2011).
About World Monuments Fund orld Monuments Fund is the leading private, non-pro!t organization dedicated to the preservation of the world’s architectural heritage. Since Wits founding in 1965, World Monuments Fund has worked with local communities and partners at more than 600 sites in 100 countries. Through !eld- work, advocacy, grantmaking, education, and training, the organization helps to pre- serve important monuments, buildings, and sites around the globe. For additional information about WMF and its programs, please visit www.wmf.org
Copyright © 2013 World Monuments Fund 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2412 New York, New York 10118
ISBN-10: 0-9858943-1-8 ISBN-13: 978-0-9858943-1-3
This report in its entirety may be freely circulated; however the images contained herein may not be used independently without the permission of World Monuments Fund and the photographers.
PHOTOS: Pages 1, 4, 6, 8, 13, 17, Back cover: Robert Reinhardt; Pages 3, 14 right, 23, 39, 41: Dr. Susan Buckham; Page 10: Friends of Arnos Vale Cemetery; Pages 12 top left, 25 Friends of Tower Hamlets Cemetery Park; Pages 12 top left, 25: Friends of Tower Hamlets Cemetery Park; Pages 14 left: Rich Barrett-Small; Pages 41: Friends of Arnos Vale Cemetery; Cover: User: Postdlf/Wikipedia Commons CC-BY-SA-3.0
2 I-spy symbol trail at Old Calton Burial Ground Contents
12 Acknowledgements
12 Introduction and Project Development
12 The Issues at Play and Main Recommendations
12 Part 1: The Edinburgh Graveyards Project
12 Part 2: The Graveyards
12 Part 3: An Improved Understanding
12 Part 4: Increasing the Audience
12 Part 5: Forward-Looking Site Maintenance
12 Part 6: Delivering Community-Led Change
12 Conclusions
3 Burial enclosure in St Cuthbert’s Kirkyard
4 Introduction and Project Development he !ve historic graveyards of Canongate, Greyfriars, St Cuthbert’s, Old Calton, and New Calton, all of which are within Edinburgh’s World Heritage Site, represent an important, Tif largely untapped, cultural resource. At present, millions of visitors walk past the gates of Canongate Kirk on the Royal Mile, for example, without being aware of the graveyard to the rear of the church. In many views around the city they are clearly an integral part of the historic fabric and character of Edinburgh, the World Heritage Site, and of what the city has to o"er visitors. In 2009, the potential opportunities that the !ve graveyards presented to the City of Edin- burgh Council (CEC) together with their stewardship burdens, resulted in a successful applica- tion to include the graveyards on the 2010 World Monuments Watch. This is an international list of heritage sites in need of timely action that World Monuments Fund (WMF) advocates for toward a sustainable future. Established in 1965, WMF is an international non-pro!t organisation based in New York that advocates for and !nances the sustainable conservation of cultural heritage in countries around the world. The organisation has an a#liated o#ce in London, WMF Britain, responsible for managing the organisation’s projects undertaken within the British Isles. Edinburgh World Heritage is the charity responsible for the coordination of action for the Edinburgh World Heritage Site. It works through (i) conservation and repair, (ii) education, outreach, and interpretation, and (iii) in$uencing decision making, working closely with stake- holders at all levels. In selecting the !ve Edinburgh graveyards for inclusion on the 2010 World Monuments Watch, the selection panel recognised that these were exceptional burial sites within the histor- ic urban landscape of the World Heritage Site, but that their extraordinary heritage was facing growing pressures as a result of rising costs at a time of declining revenues and increased needs in terms of maintenance due to general wear and misuse by the public. The inclusion on the 2010 Watch enabled the development of a partnership between CEC, Edinburgh World Heritage Trust (EWH), and WMF. This led to a series of meetings in Edin- burgh with the project group and members of the lay and professional community. At these meetings a strategy was agreed whereby a consultant, with speci!c expertise in graveyard con- servation management, would be engaged to investigate the issues at play and to suggest a pos- sible way forward towards a sustainable future. This report represents the edited results of the consultation phase and should be considered a working document open to review and comment. It is anticipated that this document will present a series of strategic recommendations that CEC might follow in order to enhance the management of the graveyards and enable them to capitalise fully on their potential as cultural amenities for the City of Edinburgh.
5 The Issues at Play and Main Recommendations he !ve historic graveyards face a number of interlinked issues that combine to leave them apparently unloved and neglected and in a self-enforcing cycle of decline, with the Tdanger of casting blight around them. In a wealthy, wel-visited capital city centre there is little excuse for this. The starting point for the spiral of decline is innocent enough—routine everyday main- tenance of the graveyards being based around tending the grass and similar activities with no remit to address the physical fabric. The natural process of decline in the physical fabric is not managed, as it is with elements of the built environment that have a clear and valued purpose, such as dwelling houses, mean- ing that decline is readily visibly measurable to the public, whereas the obstacles to caring for these site—practical, legal, and economic—are less readily appreciable. Decline is accelerated by the interpretation of health and safety procedures, with the laying "at of stone considered potentially dangerous. A fallen or "attened headstone is a highly visible sign of a lack of care by relatives (where they survive) and of a failure of other agencies to come forward where relatives can no longer be traced. The public generally avoids neglected spaces, allowing other activities to take over. Consequently, the activities that have !lled the vacuum vary. At the extreme end of the scale are drug-taking, prostitution, and teenage drinking—havens for the excluded. Exclusion also covers the lack of opportunity for people to engage with the sites. At the less headline-grabbing end, unregulated tourism also creates pressures in some areas of some of the grounds, such as guides standing on tombs to address tour groups. This enforces the perception of the graveyards as spaces for the nefarious, not as spaces for everyone. As such, the burial grounds represent a series of missed opportunities, to help improve the city around them, for the community, tourism, and general economy. Their well-being supports the well-being of their users and of the city centre. The problems are not insurmountable, but can be addressed through sustained—and sustainable—action.
South wall of Greyfriars Kirk
6 Report Recommendations 1. Undertake new research for each of the graveyards to !ll gaps in knowledge about their natural heritage, local importance, archaeological value, and historic appearance, and also to create a typology of gravestone designs. 2. Make the information about the graveyards developed by this project available online as part of wider strategy to broaden participation and collaboration in the study of these sites and to help coordinate output. 3. Develop a better understanding of the signi!cance of the two Calton Hill burial grounds, and New Calton in particular, by examining in more detail the hypothesis that these sites in"uenced wider cemetery design within the UK during the nineteenth century. 4. Increase the visitor welcome at the graveyards to encourage greater footfall and to improve visitors’ perceptions of safety. 5. Develop group marketing of the !ve graveyards, capitalising on the visitor interest in Greyfriars to encourage people to visit multiple sites, and to raise awareness of the other graveyards, particularly New Calton Burial Ground. 6. Deliver a regular programme of events at all !ve graveyards to increase visitor numbers and to create a deeper understanding of, and involvement with, the sites. 7. Appoint a development o#cer to work with a graveyard trust and ‘friends of’ groups to promote the use of the sites by target audiences and to develop promotional, outreach, and educational services as well as partnership projects. 8. Create an ‘audience development plan’ to create a detailed strategy aimed at increasing future audience involvement by developing partnerships. The plan should be likened to an interpretation strategy. 9. Develop a large-scale education project to create an events and outreach programme, including schools’ resources and a package for volunteer training, to create resources for the future management of the graveyards. 10. Draw up and implement conservation management plans for all !ve graveyards. 11. Create a more integrated system for maintenance that includes graveyard buildings and involves all stakeholders. 12. Reallocate resources to help implement steps to tackle the antisocial use of the graveyards, and therefore enhance the visitor experience of all sites. 13. Develop a large-scale conservation project involving repairs and restoration work to all !ve graveyards, including the watchtower at New Calton Burial Ground. 14. Initiate biodiversity management at all !ve sites. 15. Establish a graveyard trust with associated ‘friends of’ groups. Trustees and members of the management board to include the main stakeholders and also be representative of the heritage and cultural values exempli!ed by the sites and of the constituent groups within the local community. 16. The process of establishing the graveyard trust and ‘friends of’ groups should be launched through a media campaign of well-publicised public meetings and other events to enable members of the local communities to contribute their ideas and be involved from the outset. 17. The initial priority of the trust will be to agree and set down its mission, values, constitution, and strategic aims. 18. A memorandum of understanding should be drafted between the trust and CEC to outline the principles of partnership working
7 Part 1: The Edinburgh Graveyards Project Project Aims and Study Strategy he Edinburgh Graveyards Project (EGP) is concerned with !ve historic graveyards in the heart of Edinburgh—the three kirkyards of St Cuthbert’s, Greyfriars, and Canongate, and Tthe two burial grounds of Old Calton and New Calton. A scoping study was commis- sioned in recognition of the need to improve the care currently given to these sites, and with the aspiration that they might become well-loved community resources as well as ‘must-see’ attractions for visitors to the city. The study had the following aims:
Aim 1: To develop a body of knowledge that will help improve our understanding and valorisation of the graveyards.
Aim 2: To assess the current patterns of ‘use’ of the !ve graveyards and the potential for positive improvement.
Aim 3: To recommend options for the improved practical care and management of the graveyards.
Aim 4: To examine the potential for enhanced community participation in order to create a more !nancially sustainable model of stewardship.
Aim 5: To reach out to members of the community to gauge the nature of public interest in the graveyards and to raise awareness of the importance of this initiative.
The Edinburgh Graveyards Project set out to draw together existing information on the !ve sites and to develop current knowledge with new research. It aimed to encourage wider input into considering the graveyards’ future within the realms of available resources. The four themes iden- ti!ed in the project aims—understanding, promotion, care, and involving the community—are all interrelated within the practice of good graveyard management. Accordingly, the study also sought to understand the dynamic between these di"erent areas to determine which, if any, held the greatest strategic importance to the future care and promotion of the graveyards.
Northeast wall of Old Calton Hill Cemetery
8 Build on previous work to develop detailed thinking of what future change might look like The Edinburgh Graveyards Project is part of a longer-term process of collaborative working. At the time EGP was commissioned, these previous e!orts had achieved a broad consensus among the key stakeholders (described below) for the need to improve graveyard maintenance and to deliver on their potential to visitors. However, the detail of what change might actually look like in practice for the graveyards had yet to be fully explored. The focus on improving the "ve graveyards was led initially by the CEC Graveyard Regen- eration and Marketing Project (GRAMP), which ran during 2007-08. GRAMP considered how a large-scale graveyard project might be delivered by CEC and who potential project partners might be both within the council and across the city more widely. However, it didn’t include a detailed design brief for a regeneration and marketing project. GRAMP successful- ly brokered an agreement in principle between the CEC, EWH, the churches at Greyfriars, Canongate, and St Cuthbert’s, and the former graveyard trust at Greyfriars, to establish a new graveyard trust. This new trust would have a speci"c remit for the "ve graveyards within the World Heritage Site that are owned by the CEC (the aforementioned kirkyards at Greyfriars, Canongate, and St Cuthbert’s, and Old Calton and New Calton Burial Grounds). CEC agreed to produce the legal documents to establish the trust as an o#cial entity and this work remains in progress. GRAMP also triggered the successful application by CEC to WMF for the "ve graveyards to be included in the 2010 Watch.
Widen community input While GRAMP and subsequent roundtable discussions have brought together the main organ- isations with a stakeholder interest in graveyard management, to date there has been less of an opportunity for the wider community to help shape the future of these sites. Active community participation is fundamental for these graveyards to be transformed into successful community places. Recognising the community as the key stakeholder is a primary principle in placemak- ing1. Gaining an understanding of the extent to which local people presently feel connected to these sites is an important "rst step in the process of enabling locally led action.
To deliver maximum bene!ts the overall strategy must secure public participation within an integrated approach to graveyard management The project’s aims outline four separate themes for consideration (knowledge, use, manage- ment, and community participation), but in practice the ways in which sites are understood, used, and managed are interrelated. Appreciating how changes in one area can help to deliver positive bene"ts in another enables the most e!ective deployment of resources. The study pro- poses that Aim 4 (involving the community) is of greatest overall strategic importance since it o!ers the best means to attract ongoing resources and expertise for the sustainable management of the graveyards. Most essentially, this aim underpins the primary principle of heritage—that it should be available for all to participate in and bene"t from2.
1 GreenSpace Scotland What is Placemaking? www.greenspacescotland.org.uk/.../What%20is%20placemaking. pdf, consulted October 2011. 2 Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP) Scottish Ministers Vision for the Historic Environment 1.12 to (a) realise the full potential of the historic environment as a resource—cultural, educational, economic, and social—across every part of Scotland and for all the people; (b) make the best use of the historic environment to achieve their wider aims of economic and social regeneration; (e) broaden access to the historic environment and break down intellectual, physical, and economic barriers.
9 Project methods he study comprised !ve main areas of work: a desktop survey; research on graveyard trusts and ‘friends of’ groups throughout the UK; an exit poll of visitors to Greyfriars and TSt Cuthbert’s kirkyards and Old Calton Burial Ground; an investigation of current com- munity involvement with the graveyards; and an assessment of present graveyard management. In addition, a linked research project was carried out as part of the WMF-sponsored 2011 Yale Scholarship. The EGP Team also undertook several tasks for the general promotion of the project, including participation in Doors Open Day 2011 and the creation of a graveyards trail lea"et. During the project period a number of meetings were held with community members in order to canvas feedback and to inform the public of the project’s progress. Within this context Dr Susan Buckham also presented the !ndings of the project at the inaugural Edinburgh His- tory Festival (November 2011) and future public lectures were planned.
K A desktop survey pulled together information on the !ve graveyards held in main ar- chives and libraries, and identi!ed any academic or heritage management studies previously completed.3 As well as making this information more accessible to others, this survey has improved our understanding and interpretation of the !ve sites and identi!ed signi!cant gaps in our present knowledge and how these might be !lled in the future (see Part 3). Map regression analysis was also completed for each site. The survey and the production of ancil- lary site reports were carried out by Kirsten Carter Mckee.
3 Archives and libraries consulted included: Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland; National Archives of Scotland; Edinburgh City Archive; Edinburgh Central Library (Edinburgh Room) and online databases and catalogues including: PASTMAP; COPAC; National Library of Scotland; British Library; City of Edinburgh Council Library; University of Edinburgh Electronic Journals; University of Edinburgh Theses online; Library of Congress; British Library Electronic Theses Online Service; JSTOR; ADS; Google Books; and Internet Archive.
Volunteers clearing vegetation at Arnos Vale Cemetery, Bristol
10 Community survey respondent !lling out questionnaire in Old Calton Burial Ground
K Research on graveyard trusts and ‘friends of’ groups aimed to identify how commu- nities elsewhere in the UK have organised themselves to become actively involved in caring for a local graveyard. The study looked for evidence of best practices to act as inspirational models and to assist with an assessment of the educational and promotional potential of the !ve EGP sites (see Parts 4 and 6). Information on graveyard groups was gathered from their annual accounts and promotional information.4 Documentary research was followed up with detailed interviews, either by telephone or in person, with trust or group chairpersons or senior management sta". This study was complemented by a series of fact-!nding visits to historic graveyards in London during July 2011, linked to the Yale Scholarship project.
K An exit poll at Greyfriars Kirkyard, together with a questionnaire on community use of all !ve graveyards, aimed to provide qualitative information on current visiting patterns (see Part 4). Greyfriars was speci!cally selected for the poll to help explore how the substantial appeal of Greyfriars Bobby (c.240,000 visitors per annum5) might be expanded to include all !ve graveyards.
4 Promotional information included graveyard trust and ‘friends of’ websites, group lea#ets, newsletters, consti- tutions, etc., as well as submissions to the Eighth Select Committee Review On Cemeteries (2001), Associa- tion of Signi!cant Cemeteries in Europe handbook (2004), and the National Federation of Cemetery Friends website, www.cemeteryfriends.org.uk . 5 Greyfriars visitor !gure provided in Burial Ground Information, Consultants Pack, GRAMP 2007-08.
11 K As well as using a questionnaire, an assessment of community involvement with the graveyards collected feedback through interviews and group meetings. Consultation sought to understand how the graveyards’ future potential might be grown from current public participation (see Part 6). This task, along with the Greyfriars exit poll, was designed to create a method to establish baseline information on visitor experience and satisfaction that could be used for future evaluation of the sites. EGP also spoke to local organisations involved with heritage-related educational work and graveyard trusts from elsewhere in the UK to explore future options for educational activities centred on the EGP sites (see Part 4). Neighbourhood pro!ling was carried out to explore potential barriers to audience de- velopment at a local level.6
K An appraisal of current management involved visiting all !ve graveyards to assess each site’s overall condition, and to identify any management issues evident (see Part 5). Meetings were held with key CEC sta" to establish current management regimes and policy. Recom- mendations for improving both the care of the graveyards and current visitor experience, draw on best practice guidance (UK and, as appropriate, international), as well as examples of good practice from case studies at other sites.
6 The neighbourhood pro!les were completed as ancillary reports for the local area surrounding Canongate, St Cuthbert’s, Greyfriars, and the Calton areas.
Friends of Tower Hamlets Cemetery Park winter beastie walk
Doors Open Day 2011 at Old Calton Burial Ground
Tour of Canongate Kirkyard in support of EGP community consultations
12 S
N "" #""% #&$ #(%,& #(% %)+%&%$ ' &'$% %)+%& 3 w Burial Ground Burial w The Edinburgh Graveyards Project is looking at new ways to care for # #'%&(%& # the City’s most important burial grounds and to increase community involvement with these sites. Please let us know your views and )$ #(%,&$%"
St. Cuthbert’s Kirkyard Cuthbert’s St. Ground Burial Old Calton Ne Calton Kirkyard Canongate Kirkyard Greyfriars experience of these graveyards by filling out a short online 4 1 5 2 3 4 questionnaire at: % '%)+%& www.surveymonkey.com/s/MMCT9WP "&'""(&*'+$(' #! If you would like further information on the graveyards, to find out
2 how to get more involved yourself or for us to let you know how we are progressing over the next few months please include your contact details on your completed questionnaire or email [email protected]
5
%=AB1/@2B=>@=;=B3/<=<:7<31=;;C<7BGAC@D3G Front cover: Erected by Captain John Gray to his parents Elizabeth Wilkie and Thomas Gray, this stone has excellent examples of momento mori carvings, the symbols include a skull, crossed bones, coffin, scythe and the gravedigger’s spade, all of which were intended to remind passers-by of their own mortality.
SUPPORTED BY 1 Our inner-city graveyards are doorways into a richly evocative world full of hidden treasures that tell us about the people who lived here and how the City developed. We invite you to explore these wonderful places, to take a break from the hustle and bustle of city life and enjoy the peaceful views.
@/D3G/@2AB@/7::3/Q3B
K )63>@=;=B7=<=4B63>@=831B to support of Aim 5 (‘To reach out to members of the com- munity to gauge the nature of public interest in the graveyards’) was a team e! ort. The delivery of this element was tempered by available resources rather than any latent interest in the historic graveyards among the public. Participation in Edinburgh Doors Open Day drew around 2,000 people to Old Calton Burial Ground on the weekend of 24–25 September 2011. Guide tours were provided, as well as a family ‘I-Spy’ trail on gravestone symbolism. WMF sta! greeted visitors to St Cuthbert’s Kirk, and collected feedback from visitors us- ing the EGP community questionnaire. To support Doors Open Day, a lea" et and postcard were created to encourage people to visit all # ve sites and to complete an online visitor sur- vey (http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/MMCT9WP). EGP participation in the inaugural Scottish History Festival, with an evening talk on 29 November 2011, was supported by the circulation of both the postcard and lea" et to the Canongate, Greyfriars, and St Cuthbert’s churches, Edinburgh libraries, and the o$ ces of heritage organisations. Publicity has also included a short radio interview on BBC Radio Scotland’s ‘Café Culture’, and a cover article for the Autumn 2011 edition of WMF Britain’s Monumentum. This work has bene# ted from contributions made by project volunteers.7
K )63-/:3(16=:/@A67> was awarded by WMF to Thomas Ashley, whose study exam- ines the depiction of the # ve graveyards within nineteenth-century guidebooks. His research traces examples of continuity and change in the public perception of the sites over the nine- teenth century, and adds a further layer of appreciation of the graveyards’ relationship, both physical and social, to the City of Edinburgh.
7 Volunteers who contributed to the Doors Open Day event included David Fiddimore and Stephen Dickson. Bob Reinhardt provided photographic material for the tour lea" et.
13 NO T D S L R NT C D A USSELL PL O DUD O MA GE O TI BOS N ADEL S C GREIRSON CR O LIXMOUNT RE M MON VE R U T
RO L A V CE E T K E B R L A E TH D IN P CI -WELLCRO S ER CE H L R T R BU
W A CR G WH TLAND ST I P E S Y PL TRINITY G DBERESFORD I EY R E R M SA R S ALL DR A I H
TLAND S D R N H O B E A R S LL PARKWAY Z D R F PO D SWA O A C CR E E A T P BE BO R V A M A O T H R BERESFORD B O WALL R S A K M P V S GST QU S COMM N BOS Y V U L R R A D T D E T R WHARF S I TRINITY GDN L IGHA S SUMMERSIDE ST U R GDNS NMAINS GR FIE E A NU PL T B D RI AND N R C LAPICIDE MADIERA PL O T E T BSFRD S C AST A E S E V E Y H R P T D
ALL GREEN NETHER T T T S BOSW DUDLEY T T BALTIC A
L E E O B E
P D S U E E ASSEMB
INDUSTLA MA RO AL C A G L A H S R R T BE L A V S. E T T T S
A ALL CRES HAI O O RIFF COAL E R R
W TERR S R G PK S S LY C TH T R BOS D R A B E A
E CRAIGHALL GDNS L Y R AE L U R DI RO
CARGIL HIL C Z B R R O LAN EARL L E LA L M S A I D L R P FF BR H T T E E I E GARDEN R A T I ILL ROA F E L E S I L M FRASER R N A H
T AFTON TERR E S N W T R GRE L TY O C D A L Y TR A R L NHAM DENHAM AN O B L BOS DE R P O T OO M MITCHELL ST ALL GRO R TER NE LL R S W A GREEN O A BA YN W E A LA B YL S T PLAC T L N D H W SFRASER CRAIGHALL F S A TA W TERR L D NG S AL AGDNS DARNELL ROAD D R G KI BOS R L O L FALGA GRO F E T CRE TRA B EET STR
PITT D T S
QUI N CARRON PLAC ROSEBANK ROAD ET D
RE L T L O T L P S T
KINGH N S S IE E I EE ROA S N V GR N T K I A G TF PL
L CHANCELOT G ILES A L LIN R A S L A L GRO W AND S S
SW O G O O B W E B GRAHAM ST C P E T ST
E A T L W D N A O BONN ROSEBK E F N A N C AV IE JUNCTION E L RSO L N GRO B E C E S URL D N N D ANGORINGT H A G ON TIO L GDNS D W E N B S P L WARDIE T U NKS ARRISTON RD W PLAC I LI R PARK GH N T S LINKS YFIELD N U S N K I R D O H H FER A IE V OA T JO S WEST R IS A IRR R H A E TENNA P S E Y R R RYFIELD R L N V D Y
NELSTRAE FER R TE R Y B E G N T
A I FE T M YS N E E A W
W RO N ROA CONSTIT
E N D T O BONN J R
B RD LA N T L S E
R O A To The Royal CA S D E R
C T N N A P W NA O G A E N E D N E LD A TINTO I T Yacht Britannia U A R O PLACE N R N S S K C G R D NPILRIG E TE HO CL T T C N K D B ASHLEY O RO S MONT PAR A B R PLA W T U ARE O N CLSUM R O H PLACE R G C Y N E E D PL R A BA K E GE
V INVE R REDBRAES PLACE E TA G I D ER R R S E C E M AR
F E T RO ER U M
T LINDEAN
NU L T M A
h W D ST H A E
R N D E W N EA ROP
t M RFI
L O E O
S IALR ARK R EN
E ARRISTON i G A T STR ERFI
U F O B T SO I
ITH B D E R e N I C E I E M LEP S S L A O P P L
U O V
U ND
L P L D L S T T N P E P S P H R W RST L L P L
W T L L
L T N f M ARRISTON ARRISTO GARDENS REDB STEAD ON ROAD AD O R CKIC E RO W A GR S TER A BLA R o D T LE L O EA GR ARRISTO TER VENU GO EVA S A AD N E INV A SPRINGFIELD RO L O N O r S RDO CE R M R I R te A Y K E R a O PLA RR R E RR N W TE E FE LA N E R N IG B EA ALR K E R O PLAC CE C S EST I CR N E N B NE SPRIN E T D ACADEM R G PLA ERL R AST A S WERBER H H O EITH E E E A DRIV ALF W E A AC L WEST IT TE T TH T PA TE WERBER G R SIDE G ERR ERLE O O O RK Y ALRI T C R D V H R FIEL L RN T R L IN C RES L O EASTER D T R RA NO ARRISTON G H R K D EITH RW O ST EE RNHI E S A SMI C CO R A R C ROCHEID U N R R T S R E YE BAN E R U D TH T TERRAC YL PARK INVERLEIT CE S R D PLAC TH RRA O GD P F P E YEHILL Y AW RE TE LFOU R OR IE L OAKV R P YL A WERBER P N A E EL E L R NO O R G B L L T TH PROSPECT D ARK D I CH O W IL L S D P R GDN E E RI PLAC S N B M R L D B EASTER R RIG A E STREE D RD IL T A E W Y K O VI A S T R N WE TH P A R S E TER E A R D O N D S GR A L R RN E E T O B Y E P D HVILL CHW A N E R FIE E H P S R G O E W O V N W O E L S WO R D WERBER N E L L OR D U G A LORN I O O G YL RTH D D D NO O ST I E E N R T R U E O O NV T G L N RO Royal Botanic W B N E E T M Y AW IS D R O DR E R M VE T DB E E H A E R C A A VI T R V K EILDON STREET L N RE C E T R V I R A YRO E V L
G W PA R BE L G E K
I ER STR HALMYR LE T YEHILL STE
A EASTE ERB INVERL OGIE GR S ID Q A
R T
A W A S AR R E
A H RB ER S R P
R T A O B RN S R R Garden R S E E
THI DEN BAN GRO VERHALL JAMES T D A O W T M T EET G
D N R A E LO R E C A S T Inverleith E H E O T R D A N O R R ST P T W O WT L E T T CLAIR O H S P HERMI K E G S A GR D A L A V I E H S N LL V O BE R E R G SOUTH R S L ROA T D E RES I I R Park T THU O Y W R D R E Y A N R I L R G R R GARDENR G E A C VERBANK D A U AVENU R E E D YDE R D K W D N N H AL A G D R SP YL D TUM P N S U E T M AR R D N EN D Mc N P D TELF GDN ROA D E R E D O G A N CLAIR E T R P G Pilrig Y Y EASTER T S AG E R L D YDEN STREET S T IT ALRI T VIDSON L T R SP T S ST S O S A S D D T EA D A I R PLAC ONAL R RE M F A E McDONALD E E ET CL R C R G E L L D O Y ET ST H E R TE E R N E T WOODS N R M A LOA RE ON A K W O CR R E G LA T T D A W I PAR W N T T O Mc S D C S T R R E G BO H N E S SLOAN STREE ALRIG M PLAC R H R S E S T G E D R DE
C E A Y ION RES R S AC
OA C A E T U R T O
A O R A ST
R A N L E D R L O C SPEY REE R EAST FETTES E E NTW BELLEVUE A TER T T ANNANDALGDN A ITH INVERLEIT R D T EE E E S AD B O D POR RO Inverleith RL TERR NU D TE LD VE T DICKSON STREE RF IE IN ST T E G CLAREMONT M E BUCHANAN STREE V RI RR GR A TAL Canonmills K N T D ES S TE B SLOAN R N RE GD O ILL T UB PL S C MIL R L D A N S H N L NO T A CHEN STREE N ID CANON O Easter Road K R ETT P SH ALB R BELL P IO R L L ERT A O E KEMP STREE P R M Q
D R P T L
E H B E A R T ND S T H BELLEVUE ROA E T P R C HOPETOUN S C VO P H BALM P R D EV E O E A COLL P L E Stadium L ANN O CO L LOC
RINT P U TE N S L C H H M L A T R I D S A T L LB N P P L P L N D E E L A N L E I L G L N M C L E N I V H BELLEVUE T L R ELG N REE D V CE L O D I N I G L Y S R L P O U IV P T E B E LH SCE E U N A O L E AS P R TE L O N D R L D
G P L R T N I B A T S E ER C W IO AL D C STREE ND D A N A L RO T E R R L R C
R FETTES E N C O T
A EW E
O L E P A
G R ALB
R A E U NS C
O O N - R GREEN E Leith VENUE N
Y W L U O
R C CARRINGTON ROAD R A O
R LE C H
R G E LO A A T R D A CORN N C B R HI T L A E A L LL E GA SUMMER E LE E LO O O P L
F H E B VUE CHE
P A G ALLIS PL L G IT T R P ALLANFI ND E V R P E E T LAN T L E E N RO PL BANK E O L E E R N B
I E RO T S E S S L D GD
N U O U E N E G N AX B S R Y I L H VE H S A A U L A G CO E E S E D S N D L M T T E H I L T U V D T R E H W D B T IO P E H S A I L BELL I F R C EIT URG H YRE E N HILL L ALE B STER ROA YL A R N LB T IG R L R AC O V S P SCOTLAND S V D Y A R A V A N R R R E R R W R A B L S E E R S A T C AX A TE T V A A ENU K WHE V U
R D T BELLEVU ELGIN I D
A K R V E E D
E H R Comely U U D T D E R E B C
D N
T V D O NAN K BRUN E E O G ND E E R E T A M O B NSW E
IE E T N R ST N P URG S E
A R R A R D P C COCH E R W UND H EW D RO L R A N A HADDINGTON PL T S R D
I E N R TERR K L G
QUEEN' I L S E L E SON L E S T IC O C Q R L H N D T ER R E T S F SW T C HV D G H D I S N BOTHWELL S O O L HENDERSON RO U E IT E S S S E N ROAU H I T E Bank A CL HEN C L AL R E L R EE GDN GL OUTH A W I A ON D D OG S K B N H AI R L PL L S IC D S N L W C O N CR A VERMILL P A I RRAC U QU S D LT A E T OND PL W ADRANT F H COME S P 'S Q A B R L L Y G A SCO ELM ROW K U T S M R R I R C A W E T I K F L L MONTG E A DRIV E Y BANK RD Stockbridge A D ST L ER L V L OY L N E YFIELD G EDINA VE E E W A A I I N H
N L R T E S E PL LA N S BAN E TLA E ST
H ' L CO T PL OCHEN P C O RO T L NU S Y K P N R S S G ST G L P R WE D MONTG P S T I Broughton N E W DUNDONALD S O
O O RAEBURN PLACE CE M LA L M R L E K L O A S T A L Y A B A C L S S L SQUAR T E R M DIN CHEYNE ST A S
LLA A D N LE A YFIEL
COME R I H MONTGR T A U DEAN M L TREE T S R LGIN TE P
O S E CR A A L L BEDFORD ST D S L R S S U EE C E O S LA FETTE N T S DEAN EBU E L Q'S E ON
ARM B O SQUAR N T N T T G M BROUGHTO YFIELD PL E D TR I S Y T T T L W TON M AF COME BROUGHT S
T ON A S Y U YFIELD A IT L TON A D
ME R L H W V Y B L A C G
E EA L D YF L I S R R A S G D R R D A PK K P T EE S R N UGH S S I N G O H C E O E T S O COME A C CRA C
E ARK STREET DF EE H N ST CL ROSS N M S H K L
G RM S
NT O BAR A NO N O BE S U
BANK NEW E H GR I LEARMH L C T T T O T I P G C BROUGHTON PL N L E A D Y BANK ST M STR T R E LE P
I PK L D I MAID G T S LA L TERR L PL I L E ARK MEWS N A R O D R H T T S O IN CE E CUMBERLAND STREET L C ONTH Y HAMI LANE VI T ELM ROW INDSOR ST W H L L E M R R H N S C OUGH PIT P VIL O STEP S N P DALGETY O Y M QUEEN U T LEOPOLD PLACE L L N
T EA NC W LSIDE C L
E PLA R UNTON E BR IL YFIELD P DALGE OLD O C N STREET T E I E H S TERR B D T WELLINGTON S N I Y P A R D B T T N S R YFIELD PL A MARIONVIL A A R A E D GR C R ORCHARD P ORCHARD L A S KERR I R O AR DUB T A D M DALGE
R Y BANK GRO ERN S B L B V D T L A E T O B
N B LESLIE PL U BARO T RUNTON PLACE N I
E ’ C B A YLE C
M L O ROA A T S D S D L M A S R T NT T T L K H S O R
H S R COM E T MAR R CAR N N R A D N
K H A S T KING STR BROUGH B L L VERLEY PL U T D
R L ON S A ST M MEW A O A R D NK A FO B ON REGENT PL O C RK A L MENZIES PL L P
C E L A Y V
I R T Y IN E T A E E RO V SCEN E S A R N S L T L E E
N GL B US A CAR O S N S O S
L R L U E S D I
G H T L E D M AL O
A O L T R L N MA T W A L N R TON R E E ST D NELSON ST L S Y L W T GHTON L V R B E O N T OU IM E D
S LEARMH D RE P A L CRAIGLEITH N W BR P N E V A C D S A IN YORK LA L
D R E G A ST A GR E FE A B NUB A C Y L L O NO L R GDNS LA N S R R I E T TON L R V E G A R Y P D I
Y A D H E S CUS P K D E E PL V N L D S U C L AR A S S R R
R H R N T S BAN C D N
V GD D E PI L S IO
B H L L YOR I P 1 R W L S INK T ANN STREET INDI A R A M A BO A N N E M O I C O V K A O NN R R
Y L RM CRE EA S CAM S L P E HOW R H S S A E T I R ST TRE RO N D E T R I N YAL SH O L C T T E
R ERRAC C T
D A R A A A OS R S Y P E E TER S S ER D B L C S BRA E I GL C M R W O
O O R E CA T
O L A R A
R THUMBERLAND STREET O A R R A
R I S C U R B
C D R L R M R L R B W D S LEARMONTH GDNS N P W T E T A H R G C N G R To Meadowbank A D P A N A A NO E C O R N W O I E DUBLIN ST LANE SOUTH 9 R R R S E T L E R E L
N L GD O T T O A D A D N A
G N D R E E 0 LENNOX ST N O
H T H R N IE O S S AC MARSHALLR CT CARLTON E M
T T
C C B E TERRACE LANE R Z N B ST T Stadium ’ S L
BON E H LEARMONTH N U JA A T
N R O R A TERR U M C S T E
K Y R D P TER AI A P E N TERR MEWS
T O C R E T
T
N E R C K S R H O R D O C
O A Q TH LA Greenside I R A R U L KE C D TER
AVENUE R R ESP A R L BLINK R V A P D T R L OMNI N D ES U LD JAM C B C ORCHARD BRAE DE M A O T R R R C TERRACE EE AIC E GD S L L U GR XFO LENNOX E NO Y A C LEARMONTH JAM A S A A IGL B R O T A Y O ONN W E ANDRE ER LITTLE KING O O V E VE E C E O R E GR IT S L ST LA JAMAICA ST S LA R S R ST GDN QUEE N M LSTO H R Y A RA R T N TH S Y LL O Y O T ST D T I W R S ORCHARD R NO E R Y S H V F T Calton Hill E R LA TERR MEW Y E S E M IO S T E E A QUEEN E R WES B BB B TOLL N R W BUS T A AM O S T GREENSI B NE N GH HE S A LIN T D A T L C IG BUCKIN T A HOU AD E VI H C L R GR KB O B O N ST JAMES R E R R A STATION T L E R L Y D T alk R K R M ON R B E CL I N O A9 E N OC A A V 0 QUE T E K ENSF R D M DEAN AR s W TERRAC B E N
E L W A AY O A VE E I RRAC W S ee K V R S N D h HAN E r CENTRE W EA M W R LGR E A ult H T E
Q G T D O A E ROA Y V C E t N M P
I R ST F D I BELGRA C i E EM A N D VEL E C T R A
R T R G T U R R S E T E TH D W e Calton L Y E EGI T G - M
L EI E A A E Y TRE L ST E RO S L S H S S ISTLE STREET I A Y ESC E H P V I A CR D V S S TH L L BANK E T E S P P ST ON RE OW N I E T N PA TERR AD T IGL T A L f P E WEMYS L H RK E ON E N F O L A I H N RW M T
I A L
H K N T ETON L CFORRE S E E C L AVE A - o E C E BE S PL MEW L R Y O E R H CRA L LFORD N R H P R R PK Q E T
G GARDE S R ELGRAV UE VER L E T V LE UE N'S NS O D BAN G TER L r S I L T Y R I E B E E G A ER O Q P N F T U A T C ISTLE STREET ANDREW SOUTH B R C
e E A
S S R E R E S DER TH TR C H W ALK E S I A MI N t E C N CASTL R E R O L T E WES E PL B W R G S K
R T D a S East End
P A O R ST D T CE A G
AR S E S U S AN OAD U L N N STREE SQ T A N N Y EA I STREE S D ELFORD AVE E E SOUT S V CO
S U B W
K V A ILL B R N
A T C TERLO A S H T T A H C S T R E N E ICK A W S R N T M T D A VID S NO N DUKE’S B REE H
NUE NO E H VIE CK Dean L ST COL CHAR E GLENFI MEUSE LA T T W A P S S ST C G VE I B RI T E E A E T R T LAS T TH N L DEAN R T ROSE STREET A G B DG G YOUNG STREET S REE LTON EY I P A L E T R RO B IGLEI A T O N B RA A Village T LS BR U T S AD O A A The C T H L AE T S R LT D R S E E N W N CA D TH C W E T S T R N U R B - E ES A VIE L S RANDOLP T A TRH C SO DYKE A EW S C ROSE STREET VE GEORG TOLBOOTH K BELFOR E TH BRIDG Palace of R NUE V R F S NDO ARLOT WYN O AIGL VE UN A A CRAIGLEITH E A L CH E R RS A RINC OLD ) TH O S NEDO R P LEY B WYND
L P UN B K D LY CH PL QUEENSFERC STLE P le VELSTON B H T i AIGLEI A S U R STR Holyroodhouse
E R R N L R E A M E
C C R B N L D B L I T O P Y S R YNEDOCH PL L ROSE STREET T TH l U O H East Princes R D H O A R T R a
H A D T M A WAVERLEY y Y MEW EW L A I
R S CHARLOTTE L St Gdns D SUN R o R SCOTTISH RAVELSTON AE W S S A G R I N S H H E STATION ( RISE A R D R T E EE E SUCCOTH D S CHAR E PARLIAMENT V S RUMSHEUGH Y RANDP E R STREETL E ROSE STREET T EAST MARKET ST T N O BELF O P R E M C A U D UA S S GDNS GH GD Q E R T G E S T dens A D - U r A N DYKE BELFORE ROTH L HOP O JEFFREY O S R S ST N O Y ER L STR N BULLS HO AVELSTON U BRIDG A Y T S T S A R LENNEL D UGLA A Y P SHE A T S eet Ga U C E r C K G MEWES ES A M VILLE ST LA T CL D L CUMLODDEN C H U L S ST YROOD GAIT DN T N T E e) A O O WR ME T E C BURN STRE il A S S D RINCE K OCK ET M O T S R E S P R Sl JOHN VENU A a G R H BELFORD P L E West LAEnd est Princes St D MA oy K T T R T UL R ROTHES E K AFFORD ST A ST T W T ( A P A E V S N E S GR D E BA IL E MA L CAMPBELL VENU R L Y T G E R AN R STR N S - O P T A R S T D R S R PL K B SS BLA S O E T H NIDD R E ALMERSTON S A ER E FE D S G S T I A T T ’ N S R S S C U N H R T Q T O T YS CLOSE GE N K O C YS S C
LMON D E ILL R M Mile) Y E I D TER S KF L L
BE A R R S MANOR BLAIR V A R G ST R T E VENU TB C L T Y R O L E A M (Royal UTH Y ST
ST O G R I E T AR E A C RAMS H D E ID S CHE E K PLA S S KE T R R L A
M A T E
M C A B GDN A AR S N E UTLAND S Y PPE T L E L L S
ROA U T R GEO S R U E E MURR O G C S WI KIN WNM O C E E A T U S R G L T O E PLAC D O L R E D R C S IL R R VENU W S CANNIN STLE LEH UPPE AT S
KINELLAN ROA A E R UTLAND S CA AST G
E C C N D E W R WT
S S E H Edinburgh C S R T C R BO E
T S C NAD A O E S C I E SQ THI T PLA R S C H OHNS R N PLAC WILLIAM A STREET ES O T GE G T J G C A B I E E S I A A T
S A ORMIDALE VE O N R E R A C E R H YFIELD GARDEN A I O SHANR B I TG YDS R K T UTLAN V A HILL A
KINELLA RI MEW BO YFIELD E O A Castle G U ST R S P C C A S L W I W R M Y A G COU O R GDN D E C V T CAMPBELL L T S L L E E C T N E C W S Y R T P D E C L T STR D A H R C A R S E N L O N R B T I A LD DAL G R S E T T L R RIE M
G O H E S E G S G I RI IR L N T W E A R E D T I
FIE D GARD N E A C E F I ES A T Y OAT E R E IN S N C S D E D
W R V
A R STE W D B
E I W M EGL S C E T N E D B CO R E T C G D E E T A RR A N T O O G V T E C T E R TERRAC S E N S M S S T L R N L D K D S O A G L L J R S E COLLEGE MU TER O A O ROA O T G H O HN R X W T L WEST U ROA A G A R CAMBRIDGE E C V E A O H R AR E E R B G B S R ROA I D TES GDNS D C M O A R D S O A LL MHERIOT BR R M S E CANNING S A A ST XB E CO R N S A T A G C C A S O R O H RUMMOND T L A D S O VE R W KINGS STABLES D S K D D O W C U R
I E D A P S R TO T T E A TORPHICH R R A AVENU S EN ST P GRINDL L RG M
E RN S R SOUTH W Y ES T N C
L D E B T COAT E P A N E
W O GR
LT E W ES B O A H D P C
RS S A A R R COLLEGE W
E A Y O S T L S V C
S BRIE
R L C T R
ROA
LE STREE ST R O G KINGSBURGH GROSV E E
T PH S Y -WO E Y I
A L IC U DEWAR PLACE LANE N I A EL S P The A
R CRES E A T T V
S NICOLS HM E K
ARD L
C L T T Q R A D N D R
D R N HILL F R W O A P ABINGER GARDEN D L Y E O Y N T D I K I A E C S L I SQ OND
D PAR T B B I R L U
AI Exchange R E
AN T E S To Zoo S
RI H A Holyrood Park
D
G MOR W P U M RI K WEST MAITLAND ST S SPIT L ST S O T S O P HAYMARK N A O HILL PL E ET TER N L O P P ATES R O S W L T SO CO T E L L O E S T EST S R G H IC W R E BREAD ST D S L N T LAURISTON ST T G ET I ST E E SQ AN SE R O R T 8 R R S BROWN ST N A B R OND
I L R IN N IO R HM R H I G RICHMON OSEB S A M A E P IC T T T R S OV R S S T CHARLES ST O
U K W To Mur N G rayfield RN E HAYMARKET D FORREST R IO T E O PLE U T P EV W S D P DEVON PLAC N G BRISTO WESTER V S T ESTER E E PLAC I L L B BO STANH P N O L O A L T L S F W DN L G R RU A W CATH P STATION L E VIE A D Salisbury Crags
G Y RDD E SQUARE
D L AL T R ST D Stadium I E R N B R N I N I R R S RI Arthurs N E
S Y PL
I TH P S E R K S A G E N C S R S L R A E AC RN N N PEMB P ST P C ST T LAUR STON PL R I I R H E EGL E LA T
I EAR O E A M CARNEGIE
C L SE E N S N N E ST C S LMOU
C R I
V BU E O G ST I P L O S O A U S Q O CHI T CARNEGIE V R R E U L L T C W T S UTH S L H N I G S C T RI Seat VE E E L A CARB P RE P ON OL S R L C L G HIG P E T EE SDA RICHMOND S H S C CT R OS E I R DUNBAR S N R A I E
B L L B CHARLES ST LA QU
ER TO CRICH N TR HOWD IV S R O A E R R LAU R
D C E ST AL ST P S T W G A R R I LAURISTON L RD S E WEST R E S R N E E AR A L E DAL TER PO C ST H T V S L CALEDONIAN R EY S U D T E O O LEN L L N A R M L C L I A S PK PL D T A GEORG R O UGHT D A M S E S N RISTO Y O T L E T AUM R R R O D TO BE F NA CALEDON T R Y O E D E S ST A
L O W PL V W CR SE RBE R O R ROA S B OSSC E CAU J N
D 'HAL I UPPER GROVE PL G T N B CROSS S DS A A Tollcross R O CO E NHALL S S R D HOME
N NCO I O STREET U HN W T S D D PL L O R N G Lauriston H G R W B ST PK W L BRANDF E T R IAN PL S N T S L I U I U L SA'HAL ASH WELL PL ST C ANS CL AN E
C NK S T E ST E A H E L L N S L IR A T E T O A
SA T S B E C D L T
C R N S R G D
E R A W NY R E C O S UCHIE U S - U D L S A THCA Southside A 'H R C N AR R S T ASH O O B H PANMURE PL U A E RAC LA A L C A E F R U SQ L N N O S N K M S P
LL G SPRINGWELL PL C H O
H L A C E N
L R A PL U TERR L F I L D LE E A AR E T APPROACHFountainbridge O S T L C L F N T R M C S D
R P O T U U R S N S Y
U L ED T IN PL B OR B OV L R A R
D AL S H E L AN C N L E I D C T CRO
E O C S K O O
DOWNFIELD PL L DALE TERR k KE T l I G W NS F E MURRAYFIELD WEL T LO R N S M T A WEST IL S a MEADOW LA E H RA T R
T W END R IT N E VENU M RV L S H A D DUFF ST LA TA W Q O S U STADIUM O E St EENS H K BAIRD DPL S E D
H P R T V w C D E L E GU T R E M MPL L C o LO T OR A A S N T GIL I d O R G P L GIFF P Leonards E P K ARKSIDE S GIL H R A V SAUGHTONHALL a A P S ON S K VALLEYFIELD T T R A A O L T E T T e M P OA W ORE E B S T ARKS BAIRD E L M ILE N E E
VIE L R S
L M T ID L Y E E E GI R D GILLESPI E GROV OA S T R R A S R P
CH e CC H OA C S U N R M l T APPR A B E T VE
ES M R HOP W W A T d
ING T R R HE N
SAU R P R R K TE S d E c MU FO D T TERR i NARD D L Y R R R O GLENGYLE C E L E IE E L S RE M E A E C S RE BE R T N R E A C E ON C E R D E E O T VENU RRA N M K L T DG R M L TE TE S PAR S CLERK ST E O D Y N IBS IL E PE K D R R G P I BAI D U T R UPR ENT LV HO ACE S D The Meadows E M H T SC I RR K K O E St Cuthbert’s Kirkyard A D E R Y L E L R S R N E C L T P I U PPE R G T A N MURIESTON R U A E P YE E P D S R L R IL I N E O T E P D O H D M O D G E A E C E S L R R S XF T RR A AI R M O R LAC AMINGTO E I B L C V R CH M R YEAMAN PL ER L E E U O A P I FOWLER A ST cN R LUTT R O E N LA C T G Bruntsfield Links V Part 2: TheT GraveyardsNE D S A I D DAL E E R EILL M E OT B R A BAIRD DRIV R H T D R PL H D M T N ARGYL TYNECASTLE R I A Greyfriars KirkyardD ROOD S E E M E E R E . T PK M L MONCRIEFF E R Y R L I L ELV TER A H C E F R TER FING CE MME ST L STADIUM EN E A W N K TER R R AL RA R SU Q N DER E PAR C G RILLB ER L S O A GLADSTONE
SON R SY N H ROYAL T L T TA R VI R P KR T ST O A MOR E L E HA E R MI L Bruntsfield P MELVI S
D E L I T Y V N H D E Y S E L N CR L LIVINGSTONE A O L L O
L E D TERR C S VIE E R H T L V R Q E R V LLERFI XFO UT COMMONWEALTH
E N WHE L W R I K D S L
A PLA R B NEW A AN PLAC EAST PR F T GI I R R M T U E A ME E E A SPOTTISWOODE STREET L E O T RSE N W A N H S L O E L R N O W T R
E TO N ESTO E W ROSENEATH R POOL LD P D W S R TER E R T E IS W PR B R H Old Calton Burial Ground TFI A H O D W A D F A K Marchmont A C P T L WHE TFIELD E C WESTFIEL E N R TERR C P T S S N S MERC R FO A S I O O H E L E P O R R L T M E N I C U N E D R L R S SIENN E W P TER ELD S E D E K I ITHFIELD ATFI G MIL ER D Y C L T L N I PARK GDNS SC C NGT NE B W E S P T N
R N WHE NE E P S R T W R T E OA P R T T N W INGTO E R D E T O S N L R S E R T T E ARDEN STREET D A N E R W L B R O LL GD R R M TE O T RITCHIE P O M R A AR R E S O S C A GRANVILLETERR M H W Sciennes A Newington T R S H SC D L H L IEN N E HA C T GW O G T CR O C C D NE L D D S K R O S S N AU R R G F N A M K A O ON W A EST NewS Calton Burial Ground T 1 R GDN MERCHISTON O R A S E T N N
GT F A E C D C U A I 7 HITE N W P R Y SiteA E descriptionsMERCHISTON N D A W H R W NEW P E T T R N A AR P R TI G EW T R
A I D R
E R S U R H E U O L TOU P V A V L E L A HA A E A D W EL HA ER TT C B
A O
D L S N S C N R R W S N P RD I A D
E O A L P P N IE P LACE U L HARDEN T
D
P L A E T R I C L NS RD A K D M L M S
N E H A E E N A S B P S D TPEL H E C O P
V D W E R M NN A A R N R E E L LLON P
E R A LE SCI A T O UN D LAUDE L PL D
T STE L B A E Y ME M E R T O S M N Canongate KirkyardE R
A S O P R O GDNS U R E L R B R O P P T S PL Y
L ST I SO N W T R L A S U W AL LACK D O T TH GDNS NT I S B AC FLD A R E O W L R E T O N K N l PO P W R ER S S PL N B P K R E I N E EN A K A P S A O a A I E L L L R EE N E L A E R R W W AR V F D O S UPPER GR U
VST S n L R L Y N H P PR R P F HHAL R T BRU C D E M D E Y N T FINDHO E a L T T N MINTO I D IEST S GREENHIL V A SF N V A
T K CRES R ROA S A ARC R E T TER R StPO Cuthbert’sE CASTLE R KirkyardO SPOTTISWOODE ROAD O R T M R MARC D GR ROA KIRKHILL T G C VENUE E C H W ORD RO B B T H H A N F S R NG
STE O A PRIMROSE N R S E A I H L R
F T n O U R R L ST O R R O G CUMIN PLAC SE D A
DL HARRISON RD TH TERRACE R N S Y STREE C S E E G E U O
o TH R EMY R T
E BLACKET R VE N B B
E i K C W E F
A S U E A M E D R W C L L TERRAC
HARRISON L I R T C R S T R F ST
R E T W n L TON P AC N
W W ETT A ROA IE R
IVY TERRTLE A I R E T E
ER A L E TER S S R A A C ILL H A SP E
S NHI PR SA TER L K
MERCHISTON GR U ENH T A T R GRE P O
V TER W A B D TANE ROAD D E E PL LF UGHTO L S THIRLES GREENHILL PLACE E T PLA L PO S GDNS I D O E R EN he graveyardD of the ‘Kirk belowT theG Castle’ is an intrinsic part of theKITTL story of ChristianityAC R E R S R R TL ROA ROA S E A MERCHISTON PLAC R N E
TER A GROVE E T D YARD E D E N R R R PO L A C STREET S C C A U 0 RD E CR R E O N A V N R H M A ANE LAN UF AN E R D PRIESTFIELD ROAD
SHANDON P O E L T T A L ER T MOR C
D S L THIRLES T K E STEW R T T P BE UN S T IL GA O D E R D NA D IS S O LY EL M I A7 E D P U T I H . A R F AU O N H R TH GR L Y A S - G U A T C P M O P C TER MARGARET L T LE R G R G ST GRA M E D O E CHAMBE D D S N ETTRICK ROA I in Scotland from the Dark AgesS onwards, and its establishment during the eighthID centu- E R RL D A C T 7 E R IS AIN RD ROA O A M EL R S E AR RO A R R NTY U KI L BY S FI O R M A E N Y ST Y M T T L R N N C I A IL A PR RE C EN B N A F ( K R D IESTF G R I R EW C E T M E ES P IE O I S K F L V N S S L E A T N E TH L E RE ST TFIE D O D A C O E R E S R E IS D HAR I P O EA N E L G ND C E B G H C STR G E M E S D CR D C R L N T U 6 NU AN O E C T GDNS L E T S E A N M A C T RG E U H MA H G L E V C H S I GIL D LA T A E YF U E N T SCE A H E L N 8 R A V A L RAS P N E ry predates theG ! rst records. Despite its busy city centre location,E the site feels secluded E RMAN A P D N L N C R Q D E A IE D GREENHIL ARN NLAUDE ES D A IEL R S N N R R R R EL R T MO H H S T A O S ICK A E C LO R I S ) FIEL D AZ E RATHE ALRYMPL YF YFIELD GDNSD T D M S D D
O HLEY R OA R ST E A A D C
A S EL R LS . HOPE TERRACE LO G T M McLA R L
T DRIV D R B A N PRIES
I T C E
RR E HOL ANK E D A DER WES R N T R A E D AN
T TH TERRACER RESA PL O B TON FINDHO C
D TER R
M A L T L TE B R C R L
AN T T LAU O
B YBA E A O E A MO H E R D T O GR PEEL B T E
H H R E M D N U A B E A S AL R S T E N
NG E R and secret.S ETTRICK R TheINT kirkyard contains approximately 747 headstones, monuments, tombs, and otherC N CRESC P
B S A I N R TR S S M R A L O R R
K F D R L A N O B E N ON A EN BD N D T TE T O AY ESC T O
CR U C R R E G D R S S A C
STREE BRIARBANK W D E CRE EN R W ROA CO F D AD RO T M BA R E L O H D R O ILL P CHURCH HILL R S HUTCHISON L A H H CLINTON G N R P C I E GHA N A D CHUR LACKFORD RD GRANG R M R T D B S T
K HUTCHISON ROA K S L A S 8 G
N FI B OA N HL N O RI P T D C R C N T MO ER Y RES O D D
L N T A D E K A ST D E A E L N E O D R Y G PO M O N A A70 TER E ON N S S T E SPstructures. The watchtower is of historical importanceA as it providesL evidenceR of changes toVEN T C TERRAC RB OA R ID ERR E O HI E E T AC T R R OV G L R F S S A O P I
N L TC D N T A N L EL E NK E I E T N D
E LLS T TERRAC D N RO E F RD S HU CROSS E T R MONKWOOD R 7 V AD R GRANG ' R ER ALBE GE LO N D N S B AN R GRA A CT P AC 0 R N O C SER GA B D D 2 E CLEARBURN ROA E W T ES O E 1 N L R CH R EWBATTL S W E TERR C R ENU CO burial traditions during the lateACE eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries arising from the E ROA E V A R A Y D P S S ONH A LL IS U
H E TC E N C CH H O P MI T ISON A
E N -ARD R HU G ON AVENU DUN CE D CAMERO R R FALC F A R K A E R ALCO GDNS B RR NS O practice of ‘bodysnatching’. An early area of the kirkyard knownTE as the ‘Knowe’D D has an interest- K G C S LA L L AVIL H M N CU ROAD ANGE E S FFE Y ALD L T OL
HUTCHISON ROA A E D OSW GR ROA R S D D N A A C E G SP N E O F S W R N ACKFO R UF A HU C O A S M PE S T ED R ST RI D T
E HUTCHISO C H I A A E H NG RO AS E R I D N E R C SON P T R D
N A O A ER RELUGAS A O V D RO N R A T A S R V L D WE A E E ing and importantM R LL collectionROA of eighteenth-century headstones. ILE T
E U M CON ST POWBU V FAL C ALBANS ROA E A D O E N ON O F W T S N AL S VEN IS EF Y SAINT E U R O E WE
A H R N C ROAD E C N R AC ROA S ALD N T O INGVALLEY O W L O L T R SPR P S U N SOUTH OS D O I S A GILMOUR ROA A H T L D RD W H N N A E GDNS L'S P H OSWAL D UGA V M STEE SOUT D ILE PLA A EL G OA R ROA TCHIS E R L D S G L A U WOOD A I UG E H G S E L L S LAN D E E I D AN V ST R PANYI C S SUFFOLKGRANBY ROA S AL E PARK A T M E N
WE CAN R T W
O VILLE TERRAC
L B DE E A O LA
R A R U N AD O
N T EAST CHAM A D R A LL R
R HA
E N I K G N G N
N RTO
O D R R N D M MacDO R
A A
G N S T G
R R L B O Y E I N S B RD
S O LA E S KF D TER RDAN EN LAC T P S A D MILL JO R
I L MILLAR P CRES L S D G T WEST S O O TER R ROS
E R
R M M AC EGGET D N W D L W AR A A E A R LAN ILLAR T L D T M RO - E O IE A R R R PL L PL LG T N A S ER AL ROVE U TON Y RH O D S L LOCK GDN T TE R I CHA ST N R A ELL NILE GRO U NK D W D CRAIGLOCKHA AXW U IN ROA A M L NY L D O U S C L ROA E L RHAL RIV N R C CHARTE D KIN YGO AN L
St Cuthbert’s with Edinburgh Castle in the background Gravestone of David Gray (d. 1717)
8 Figures for the number of monuments etc. at all ! ve sites are taken from Burial Ground Information, Consul- tants Pack, GRAMP 2007-08.
14 Old Calton Burial Ground escribed as ‘One of the most signi! cant and important of Edinburgh’s graveyards’9 this site is unusual as it was not established by an ec- Dclesiastical body, but by the Incorporated Trades of Calton. Laid out in 1718, the graveyard was later divided in two by the construction of Waterloo Place in 1817. Its resulting layout in two parts is highly signi! cant as evidence of the development of the New Town and Calton Hill area. The scenic value of the southern part of the site from the Old Town and North Bridge is outstanding. The burial ground contains approximately 412 headstones, monuments, tombs, and other structures dating from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. These are of exceptional quality, in- cluding three nationally important monuments; the Lincoln Statue, Mar- tyr’s Monument, and Hume’s Mausoleum. The site contains several eighteenth-cen- tury headstones with well-executed trade and mortality carvings. The graveyard is also noted for its high quality screen walls facing onto Waterloo Place. Internally, almost all boundary and compartment walls are lined with burial enclosures resulting in a picturesque setting, which, it has been suggested, in" uenced the layout of Highgate Cemetery in London.10 Burial enclosures next to The site’s value architecturally, as a work of art, Stone to the parents of Captain David Hume’s Mausoleum and its historical importance are outstanding. Thomas Grey (1747)
New Calton Burial Ground ew Calton was established in 1817 and was also founded by the Incorporated Trades of Calton. The site is of outstanding historical importance and its association with NOld Calton constitutes a signi! cant and integral part of the historical development of Calton Hill. It is also considered important because of its nature as a transitional type of burial landscape, which was a precursor to the modern cemetery movement.11 It is a well-designed site with distinctive terraces and a striking south-facing slope a# ording outstanding views over the Scottish Parliament, Palace of Holyroodhouse, and Holyrood Park. The burial ground con- tains approximately 1,000 headstones, monuments, tombs, and other structures of high quality spanning the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, including a watchtower that is currently burnt-out but which could be developed for some complementary use.
View of terraces and watchtower ‘Misfortune consoling Wisdom’, detail from Andrew Skene’s stone (d.1837)
9 Listed Building Description HB Number 27920. 10 Calton Hill Conservation Plan, August 1999, Appendix 7: Architectural Gazetteer prepared by Law & Dunbar- Nasmith p53. 11 Boyle A et al, 1985, Ruins and Remains: Edinburgh's Neglected Heritage; Curl, James Stevens, ‘John Claudius Loudon and the Garden Cemetery Movement’.Garden History Vol. 11, No. 2: 133-56.
15 View of the rear of the kirkyard from Regent Road. Detail from the ‘Coachdrivers’ Stone (c.1765). Canongate Kirkyard he graveyard of the ‘Royal Kirk’ was established in 1687 and has signi!cant local amenity value. Distinguished persons buried at the site include the economist Adam Smith and Tthe poet Robert Fergusson. In 1953, the mercat cross was relocated to within the kirk- yard’s boundaries. The kirkyard contains approximately 352 headstones, monuments, tombs, and other structures. Burial enclosures line the western and southern walls in the north section, and are also found in the northeast corner of the site. The graveyard is important for the contribution it makes to the greening of distant views in the Old Town and for retaining an impression of how the Canongate may have looked when it was !rst developed. The kirkyard is a key element within a group of buildings that survive as the historic core of the former Canongate Burgh.
Greyfriars Kirkyard he kirkyard was founded on the site of a former Fran- ciscan friary in 1562, following a grant of land by TMary, Queen of Scots. The graveyard predates the es- tablishment of the kirk in 1620. Although popularly associ- ated with Greyfriars Bobby, this site was the setting for many historical events of national signi!cance, including the sign- ing of the National Covenant in 1638 and the imprisoning of Covenanters after the Battle of Bothwell Bridge in 1679. The kirkyard contains approximately 716 headstones, mon- uments, tombs, and other structures. It also incorporates a stretch of the Flodden Wall, part of the City’s sixteenth-cen- tury defences. The graveyard makes a signi!cant contribu- tion to the greening of distant views in the Old Town and to the setting of the surrounding buildings. Greyfriars holds exceptional importance because of the range of architectural styles found at the site, spanning the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries. The monuments Seventeenth-century wall include evidence of transi- monuments to James Chalmers tional periods, examples of (foreground) and Elizabeth Paton datable stylistic change, de- (background). signs attributable to the in"uence of pattern books, and evidence for the di#usion of styles and motifs from this site across the Lo- thian area. The monuments show exceptional quality in terms of their materials and execution, and represent the work of leading masons and architects. As so little sculpture survives from seven- View of the Covenanters’ Prison. teenth century, the collection at Greyfriars is a major resource.
16 ld and New Calton burial grounds and Greyfriars, Canon- gate and St Cuthbert’s kirkyards are all of exceptional Ocultural signi!cance to both Edinburgh’s historic urban landscape and Scotland’s heritage. Each graveyard holds multiple statutory designations relating to the architectural, historical, and landscape values embodied within the site, denoting their national and international importance. The burial grounds contribute to the high levels of integrity and authenticity of Edinburgh’s outstanding universal value as a designated World Heritage Site. All !ve graveyards are unique in their instigation, development, and relationship to the City of Edinburgh. When considered to- gether, their association with local and national civic, religious and political events throughout the last 500 years constitutes them as a vital resource in understanding the development of the city and the events that have shaped both Scottish and British society into its present day state. Other early Edinburgh graveyards have not sur- vived. These !ves sites taken as a group document the major social and cultural revolutions of the modern period—the Reformation, the Enlightenment, globalization, and the onset of the industrial Cannongate Kirk, Alexander McCrae ESQ revolution—at a human scale to demonstrate how they touched people’s lives. Together their chronology o"ers a genealogy for the City of Edinburgh that dates from the early Christian period into the !rst half of the nineteenth century. The surviving architecture and stone-carving display developments in both funerary practice and traditional crafts now largely lost to modern society. Each of the burial grounds commem- orates many notable persons from Scottish social and political history, as well as those successful local merchants and craftsmen who helped Edinburgh prosper. These !gures are celebrated through the highest quality architectural and artistic forms. Being preserved within their orig- inal setting further enhances the gravestones’ value as cultural documents and enables them to be visited and experienced by all, as was intended at the time of their construction. At the same time, the graveyards’ common and mass graves a"ord a !nal resting place to all social groups, and as a result hold evidence for all levels of society. The burial grounds display important landscape values that help characterise the spatial structure of the Old and New Towns. Canongate is situated on the Royal Mile, which forms the spine of the Old Town, and is a major thoroughfare linking the castle and the Palace of Holyroodhouse. The development of Greyfriars Kirkyard is closely linked to the development of Edinburgh itself, with the graveyard’s extension demarked by the city’s boundaries of the Flod- den and Telfer walls. The New Town contains a series of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century park-sized town gardens that re#ect neoclassical planning and the picturesque aesthetic tradition. The two Calton burial grounds and St Cuthbert’s are located within this internationally important designed landscape area. In modern times these green spaces make an important contribution to the natural environment, the city’s biodiversity, and are valuable local amenities. Despite the signi!cance of the burial grounds and the unique qualities of many of the monu- ments with them, they remain under-researched and vulnerable due to the very nature of their construction and materiality, from misuse, and in- adequate protection. Successful long-term con- servation requires a strategic approach combin- Old Calton Hill Cemetery, Burial Enclosure ing the e"orts of public and private agents.
17 Current Graveyard Management his section outlines the legal and policy framework for managing the graveyards as her- itage assets, open spaces, biodiversity areas, and as sites for burial provision. The speci!c CEC thematic plans and strategies described below are identi!ed as having particular T 12 relevance to management of the graveyards.
Strategic and legal framework All !ve graveyards are owned by CEC. They are managed within a strategic policy framework that includes CEC regional and local development plans and strategies13 and Scottish Govern- ment policies for the historic environment and planning.14 The management of the graveyards takes into account national legislation15 and the statutory and non-statutory designations that apply to these sites individually, which are set out in the table below.
WHS Site Designed Landscape Listed Building Conservation (Non- Natural (Non-Statutory) Area Statutory)
National Inventory Old Calton Category: A New Town √ SSSI and Local list
National Inventory New Calton Category: B New Town √ SSSI and Local list
National Inventory Category: A St Cuthbert’s New Town √ and Local list Category: A Group
Category: A Canongate Old Town √ Category: A Group
Category: A Greyfriars Local list Old Town √ Category: A Group
Table 1: List of Statutory and Non-Statutory designations applying to the graveyards.
City of Edinburgh Council Open Spaces Strategy 2010 In accordance with national policy, the CEC Open Spaces Strategy aims to ensure a coordi- nated approach to protecting and developing the city’s network of open spaces. The strategy covers all of the city’s cemeteries (including Old Calton and New Calton Burial Grounds) and several of the larger kirkyards (including St Cuthbert’s, Greyfriars, and Canongate) where they ‘make a signi!cant contribution to townscape’ and in some cases ‘where there is a tradition of heavy public use for informal recreation and rest during daylight hours’. The action plan sets out the actions needed to improve the quality rating of the two Calton burial grounds from ‘poor’ to ‘fair’.
12 Other policies relating to the heritage management also include the structure plan which sets out the long-term vision and framework for land use development. Together with local plans, they form the development plan, against which all applica- tions for planning permission are assessed. In due course these will be replaced by the strategic development plan and local development plan respectively. See also the Edinburgh Partnership Single Outcome Agreement 2009-12, Outcomes 11 and 12, Edinburgh City Local Plan (4.2). 13 For more detailed descriptions of the regulatory framework for the management of built heritage in Edinburgh see The Old and New Towns of Edinburgh World Heritage Site Management Plan 2011–2016, CEC Guidelines for Managing Edin- burgh’s Built Heritage, CEC Edinburgh Planning Guidance Gardens and Designed Landscapes. 14 Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP) sets out Scottish Ministers’ policies for the historic environment see also Scottish Planning Policy, notably SPP 23: Planning and the Historic Environment, and the National Planning Framework For Scotland 2. 15 - tion: Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)(Scotland) Act 1997; Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997; Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006.
18 WHS Site Designed Landscape Listed Building Conservation (Non- Natural (Non-Statutory) Area Statutory)
National Inventory Old Calton Category: A New Town √ SSSI and Local list
National Inventory New Calton Category: B New Town √ SSSI and Local list
National Inventory Category: A St Cuthbert’s New Town √ and Local list Category: A Group
Category: A Canongate Old Town √ Category: A Group
Category: A Greyfriars Local list Old Town √ Category: A Group
Canongate Kirkyard
City of Edinburgh Council Local Biodiversity Action Plan 2010-15 The core objectives of the action plan are to protect and enhance priority habitats and species in Edinburgh, and to raise awareness of biodiversity in local communities. Speci!c targets for graveyards include increasing community involvement and biodiversity management planning at selected cemeteries and kirkyards, although the sites to deliver these targets have not yet been selected.
Grounds maintenance—CEC Bereavement Services By the end of the nineteenth century, the deterioration of the graveyards’ condition raised concerns over public health. Their upkeep had became more onerous and as a result their own- ership and the responsibility for their day-to-day care began to be transferred into the hands of the Edinburgh Corporation.16 Today, CEC Bereavement Services Section manages the sites on behalf of the council. None of the EGP sites are in active use for interments, although the occasional burial of cremated remains might still take place in cases where lair (grave) rights exist. The Bereavement Services Section, which is based at Mortonhall Crematorium, carries out grounds maintenance works on a rolling basis to all the graveyards in CEC ownership (see Part 5 for more details).
16 ‘Cemetery Administration and Practice in Scotland’. Paper by John T Je"rey, City Superintendent of Parks and Recorder of City Burial Grounds Edinburgh, presented at the Seventh Joint Conference of Cemetery and Cre- matorium Authorities 1938.
19 Part 3: An Improved Understanding
nderstanding the graveyards is the basis for local communities, visitors to the city, and graveyard managers and funders to be able to value, enjoy, and support these sites—an outcome exemplifying key national and local objectives for Scotland’s historic envi- U 17 ronment. With good knowledge of the range of the interest areas, and associated values that a graveyard holds, it becomes easier to develop fundraising potential. Being able to articulate the signi!cance of a particular graveyard or feature strengthens the case for support with com- petitive funding bids. Funding may also be allocated on the basis of greatest need, as well as importance, therefore it is desirable to be able to document the current issues facing a site, for example, in terms of their condition or excluded audiences. Aim 1: To develop a body of knowledge that will help to improve our understanding and valorisation of the graveyards.
What does a sound ‘body of knowledge’ look like for graveyards? Graveyards are arguably among the most complex of all historic assets to understand. They embrace a wide range of interest areas relating to both the built and natural environments. While it can complicate interpretation, this diversity is one of their greatest strengths as cultural amenities. To manage a graveyard in a balanced way, the relative importance of individual areas of value need to be weighed against one another, so that an informed decision can made about what is most important to protect on the ground.
We need to be able to convey a graveyard’s complexity in an inclusive way to others. If asked what is important about a historic graveyard, a family historian, local dog walker, stu- dent of architecture, tourist, church member, lichenologist, academic, or o"ce worker on a lunchtime break may well respond very di#erently. Yet by connecting to what one audience !nds most interesting and then placing this theme within a wider understanding of a site (what others !nd interesting) we might ensure that more people are successfully drawn into a grave- yard. In this way they also leave with a better understanding of why a site might be important to others.
Taking a break at Canongate Studying the gravestone carvings in Old Calton Burial Ground
17 Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP), July 2009. Key Principle 1.14 d. ‘all of the people of Scotland should be able to enjoy, appreciate, learn from and understand Scotland’s historic environment, and be assisted in that through access, research, knowledge, information and education and proactive conservation investment, without compromise to cultural signi!cance.’ City of Edinburgh Council and Edinburgh World Heritage, The Old and New Towns of Edinburgh World Heritage Site—Management Plan 2011-2016.
20 What is the existing level of recognition? Current recognition of the EGP sites can be seen both through the graveyards’ designated status and from the strategic policies that apply to them. More generally, however, their recognition is evident through the ways in which they are documented in publications and other written re- cords. When this information (Table 2) is compared to the potential values graveyards might hold (Figure 2), we see that only a fraction of their conceivable richness has been explored to date.
Old Calton New Calton St Cuthbert’s Greyfriars Canongate Group Studies Memorial Y* Y Y Y* Y Y Inscription Gravestone Y Y Y Y* Y Y Designs Gravestone Partial study Complete survey* Surveys Graveyard Y Condition Plans: Designed Heritage Designed RCBG9FJ5H=CB Landscape Management Management Landscape Survey Survey R$5B8G75D9 Management Graveyard Y Y Y Y* Y History R IA9G R H< 9BHIFM Mausoleum R9A9H9FM RCJ9B5BH9FG I=896CC?G Thematic R%5FHMFG Movement Prison R AREAS OF INTEREST ASSOCIATED WITH CULTURAL AND NATURAL V ALUES Architecture Art Achaeology Amenity and Recreation Bio-diversity Geo-diversity Geology History Landscape Design and Development Values Religious and Beliefs International Area of Site/ National Group of Features Burial Landscape ETTING Regional S Understanding of a Graveyard’s Group of Sites MPORTANCE Local AND I Unique Signi!cance Setting and OF Community Group Local Environs Family Compare to CALE ONTEXT S Individual Other Graveyards C Archaeology Archaeology Oral History Documentary Environmental Below-ground Below-ground Above-ground Above-ground and Associations and Activities Onsite Activities Public Perception Perception Public RECORDS OF INFORMATION Figure 2: Matrix showing potential graveyard interest areas 21 While their architectural, historical, landscape, and amenity values are recognised locally, nationally, and internationally, the graveyards’ natural heritage values have been less well con- sidered, with no eco-surveys or other recording work carried out at any of the sites.18 None of the graveyards is speci!cally included in the CEC biodiversity strategy, and although the two Calton burial grounds fall within a Site of Special Scienti!c Interest (SSSI), neither graveyard is judged to hold particular ecological value.19 Our survey of published material and other written records on the graveyards (Table 2) also reveals a partiality towards the built heritage. There is a notable focus on the architectural qual- ities of their monuments, seventeenth- and eighteenth-century gravestone carvings, and aspects of their landscape design and development. Attention has focussed on the material remains that survive above ground, and other sources of information are relatively neglected. No archaeo- logical assessment of the sites and their setting has taken place and there has been very limited consultation with communities to capture public attitudes toward the sites or the nature of their use for amenity and recreational purposes. A consideration of the graveyards’ context and setting is similarly patchy. Some sites are better studied and recorded than others. Greyfriars is notably favoured in this respect, while Canongate is unique in that no detailed kirkyard history exists. Although Greyfriars is better studied, there is still little in the way of detailed, academic analysis of this site. This situation is indicative of the much wider neglect of ‘Scottish death’ as an area for academic endeavour.20 A 1985 study sets out a chronology for the establishment and use of all of the city’s main grave- yards, including the !ve EGP sites. Research reveals how their development relates to other city-centre graveyards, to key developments in Edinburgh’s history, and to wider burial and commemoration trends within the UK.21 Research undertaken for the 2011 Yale Scholarship on the depiction of the graveyards in nineteenth-century guidebooks shows how the attention paid to the sites has been remarkably consistent over the last 200 years. By far the greatest volume of coverage is dedicated to Grey- friars and the least to New Calton and St Cuthbert’s, which have minimal appearance in tour guides. This balance (or rather imbalance in interest in the sites) bears very strong parallels to current visiting trends (see Part 4), as well as wider writings on the graveyards (Table 4.1). 18 Pers. comm. CEC Biodiversity O"cer. 19 DLS, not mentioned in the listing description. 20 Elaine Mcfarland,‘Researching Death, Mourning and Commemoration in Modern Scotland’ Journal of Scottish Historical Studies 2004, Vol. 24, No. 1: 20–44. 21 Boyle A et al, 1985, Ruins and Remains: Edinburgh's Neglected Heritage. 22 Which gaps in knowledge are the priorities to !ll so that they can attract the greatest possible audiences and resources? Documenting what exists at a site is the !rst stage in being able to recognise a graveyard’s range of values. The main gaps in current knowledge that should be a priority to address in future work include: K Improved understanding of the criteria for evaluating the importance of gravestones, including the more mundane, but potentially informative, elements that are often overlooked. Several of the small eighteenth-century headstones in There is minimal information to identify which stones Greyfriars have become displaced from their original are the most important in New Calton Burial Ground positions (established 1817). K Identifying built features other than gravestones and buildings. Important to help identify less well-known, and therefore more vulnerable, features at each site. K What did the graveyards look like in the past? Gaining a full understanding of the evolution of a graveyard is essential before decisions can be made regarding which periods to give precedence to during conservation management planning. Postcard image of Greyfriars Kirkyard in 1924 23 Headstone from Canongate Robin perching on a headstone in St Cuthbert’s K A better understanding of the condition of all aspects of the graveyard. Important because it provides a baseline to map future changes in levels of preservation and to identify current threats. K Improved understanding of the graveyards' natural heritage. Nature is a signi!cant and diverse interest area for historic graveyards. K Improved appreciation of the local value of sites. A more detailed understanding of what particular attributes are valued by the local community can be used to ensure these are protected for future generations. It o"ers a chance to draw in audiences by telling di"erent, more socially inclusive stories about the graveyards. K More interdisciplinary studies are needed to understand the relative importance of di"erent areas of interests. K There is a need to coordinate knowledge. At present there is no champion for the development and coordination of knowledge about the !ve graveyards. ‘Sometimes you get some nice little stories on the gravestones, the rather tragic things are the ones that stick in your mind’ —V$%$&'( &' G()*+($,(% $-&)(.$)/)0 '- BBC R,0$' S1'&2,-0 Recommendations he following recommendations will help to develop a body of knowledge that will Timprove our understanding and valorisation of the graveyards: 1. Undertake new research for all of the graveyards to !ll gaps in our knowledge about their natural heritage, local importance, archaeological value, and historic appearance, and to create a typology of gravestone designs. 2. Make information on the graveyards developed by this project available online as part of a wider strategy to broaden participation and collaboration in the study of these sites and to help coordinate output. 3. Develop a better understanding of the signi!cance of the two Calton burial grounds, and New Calton in particular, by examining in more detail the hypothesis that these sites in#uenced wider cemetery design within the UK during the nineteenth century. 24 Part 4: Increasing the ‘Audience’ eveloping an inclusive audience for the !ve graveyards supports the fundamental prin- ciple that heritage should enrich people’s lives.22 Good public spaces should promote Dhappiness, health, and well-being. Graveyard visitors want to go to safe, welcoming, and enjoyable places where they can relax and unwind or participate in educational activities. As more people are encouraged to visit the graveyards, this in turn will create a cycle of positive interest in them. The local audience comprises all those who live, work, worship, study, or socialise within a graveyard’s neighbourhood. As these sites are cultural assets for Edinburgh as a whole, an inclu- sive community audience will embrace all of the city’s residents. The second major audience comprises visitors to the city. Edinburgh attracts millions of visitors throughout the year, and these numbers are currently at an all-time high, with heritage attractions playing a leading role.23