The Castle Car Park and its surroundings will be transforming next year into a park with a children’s play area, Blue Badge parking, places for sitting, picnics and contemplation and paths for wandering. All of this will be happening in a part of York which holds an important and incredible history.
On 4th July we tested possible stories we could tell and possible ways of telling the stories. The questions we explored focused what piques curiosity so we can understand which routes through specific stories might be most compelling to people. We also asked about different approaches to telling stories – including signs, uses of space, audio and models.
The key messages work – and they really resonate with today
We tested an overarching message for the area:
York Castle: A place where power, justice, conflict and community are revealed across 1,000 years of history
We then tested a key message for the Clifford’s Tower and the current car park:
York Castle as a Place of Royal Control
And then for the Court, Eye of York, Debtor’s Prison and Female Prison (York Castle Museum):
York Castle as a place of politics and punishment
The messages were received positively as conveying the area’s significance. It was also noted that there are contemporary resonances to many of the key themes – e.g.- central control / regional resistance.
Model – great idea… but think bigger scale
One challenge of naming the area York Castle is that only fragments of the Castle remain. We explored the idea of a model that could make visible the location of York Castle and the other layers of history since, not least the 19th century prison. The idea of a model was welcomed but it was felt it needed to include the whole area (including the rivers and Baile Hill) to help convey the context. This bigger scale is already reflected on a plan currently in situ at the base of the Clifford’s Tower motte so a question will be how to link the model to this plan.
Information can be layered to avoid overwhelming – but we should make the most of actually being there
Information can be parcelled out in different ways, to keep it less intrusive and to engage people whose level of interest and engagement may vary. This might include background hints, specific physical (mostly written) information and further stuff on the internet via QR codes or other means.
Paving level interventions such as inset features, patterns, material changes can do a variety of things – it as felt that they can evoke themes (e.g. fishing) but might also lead people towards a destination, such as a viewing point over the Foss.
The use of QR codes was welcomed as an option for people who didn’t speak English. More pictures were encouraged as they are good both for people who don’t speak English and for children. However, simply being in the place was felt to be the most important element (without being shouted at by signage). It was felt the primacy of experience shouldn’t be lost.
Different ways of telling stories – but in ways that bring us together
It was felt that different ways of telling stories that recognise different learning styles would be ideal. This could include text, audio, experiences in places, QR or other digital means. While tailoring stories to individual preferences was seen as necessary, it was also argued that ideally we would be telling stories in ways that encouraged social contact. So a vision of people walking round the site with headphones on wasn’t seen as supporting the key messages of the site or intentions of the new area. Instead a key question asked was whether we can develop modes of interpretation that bring us together?
Everyday stories are powerful if told in their place – and each of these stories have more than one side
Telling specific stories was seen as being all the more compelling if you can say ‘and it happened right here’. It was also noted that so many of these stories are about power and that there is always more than one side to any story. Might we tell these stories in ways that open up the different perspectives and experiences?
As part of these discussions, we tested a number of specific stories. In all cases the stories need to be developed in a way that complements the existing interpretation developed by English Heritage at the base of the motte, such as the timeline and plan of the area.
Defend the city and do some fishing: Foss and the King’s Fishpool
In 1069 William the Conqueror dammed the River Foss to create the moat around York Castle. It also creating a big lake that formed part of York defences – it’s why there is a gap in the city walls. Where the Foss was dammed, the lake became home to fish – a potential ready source of food for the city, and for the castle and indeed its royal occupants. We know that fish from the Foss was served at the celebration of the wedding of eleven-year-old Margaret of England to ten-year-old Alexander, King of Scots, the only royal wedding to ever take place in York.
The most important thing for this story was to get as close to the river as possible to see its present form and imagine its past extent. Information boards shouldn’t distract from or disconnect from The Foss, but it was also felt that information sited close to where people want to linger (such as a place where the river can be seen) is more likely to get read. The best viewing platform is on top of large stones – could the height of the Victorian prison walls be indicated here?
There were two castles! Baile Hill
York was the only city in England outside of London that had two royal castles within their city boundaries. William the Conqueror built two castles to control the Ouse – one on either side – to protect against Viking raids.
There was an interest in understanding the fundamentals such as why the castles were sited here and how this connected to the ‘Harrying of the North’.
The proposed location for this story is on the radial path around Clifford’s Tower. In the discussion it was clear that there is a sensitivity about intruding into the “Lowry view” by putting upright features there. For some people, it was felt that care needs to be taken about any interruption of the circular walk; if it’s a contemplative walk then even inset pointers are a distraction. Are there ways of signposting / “trailing” it to get people to go take a look that doesn’t require signage? Or can this be dealt with by having very low and unobtrusive signage as part of the margins of the radial walk?
When hanging stopped being public, it happened here: The Last Drop
Hangings used to happen in public outside York Castle. In 1868 they became relatively private and took place here, within the Victorian prison. Dr Frederick Parker, executed on 4th April 1868, was the last person to be publicly hanged before the execution moved to inside the prison walls as a result of the Capital Punishment Amendment Act 1868, which passed the following month. Two men were hanged at the Last Drop. Vincent Knowles Walker, hanged April 15th 1878 and August Carlson, hanged 22nd Dec 1896. Hanging was made illegal in 1969.
People were struck by powerful sense that ‘this happened here’ and welcomed the idea the place should be quiet and reflective.
York Castle Museum research has drawn attention to the posthumous element of the punishment which was to be buried in unmarked graves. One question we explored was whether we should name the two men who were hanged and there was a general feeling that we should.
It was felt that we needed to bring out the moral questions – what is bad and who decides? Should this be put in global context given that many countries still execute today?
The stories of the Eye of York through a talking tree/audio installation
The tree at the centre of the Eye of York roundabout could be a place where stories of protest are told. It was where William Wilberforce was elected. Where those campaigning for shorter working hours for women and children came to protest. An idea we tested was whether the tree might house an audio installation. This raised concerns related to whether it would be too loud (and intrusive to other nearby spaces) or disturbing to visitors (especially those who are neurodiverse). For others it was welcomed but it was felt that the sound should be audible only under the tree and should be actively turned on by listeners, rather than on all the time. We discussed that having a choice over the story and knowing how long each story would last would be positive. There were positive comments about appealing to people who learned in different ways.
1190 Memorial Space
We tested new wording for the 1190 plaque developed through a collaboration between York Liberal Jewish Community, English Heritage and the Centre for Study of Christianity and Culture, University of York and the approach to the 1190 memorial established through previous workshops.
The plaque wording is:
In March 1190, Rabbi Yom Tov and the Jews of York sought protection in the royal castle on this site. The few who agreed to convert to Christianity in exchange for safe passage were killed upon leaving the tower. On Friday 16 March, under attack from a violent mob and facing certain death, those remaining chose to die by their own hands
תנצב״ה
May their souls be bound up in the bond of life
The importance of supporting understanding of 1190 was welcome. It was noted that it is a complex story so needs to be done with care. This needs to include spelling out the basic story for those who don’t know and then layering in the more complex one.
Key questions people had included: Why did it happen – what drove it, what was the broader context? What was the tower like at that time? What happened afterwards? (including showing that Jewish people were again active in York very soon after 1190).
The idea that it was a space for quiet reflection was welcomed with an emphasis on “bringing light” and on being open to difference and living together.
Next Steps
The next steps are for the Council’s Regeneration Team and the Design Team to work with your feedback to develop the initial stories we tell and the different ways these will be told within the York Castle area.
The final interpretation installations will be part funded by York & North Yorkshire Combined Authority.