British Museum (Lindisfarne Gospels) (Hansard, 8 April 1998)

§ Mr. Fraser Kemp (Houghton and Washington, East)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for the transfer of the Lindisfarne Gospels from the British Museum to a location in the North East Region of England.

I shall first give a brief history of the Lindisfarne gospels. They were written and illuminated at the end of the seventh century—some 1,300 years ago—by monks who had come from Ireland to establish Christianity in Britain. They were produced in commemoration of a famous saint, St. Cuthbert, in honour of God. They remain one of the greatest literary and religious masterpieces in the world.

For their first 700 years, the gospels remained happily and peaceably in the north-east of England. In the 1530s, Henry VIII's commissioners decided to take them from Durham, largely because of the value of the gold around them. I am glad that that aspect of Britain's turbulent past has gone. I doubt that the Crime and Disorder Bill, which the House will consider shortly, will deal retrospectively with the theft of the gospels from the north-east 500 years ago, much as I would like it to. We are prepared to forgive and forget, however—hence this Bill.

In the past 100 years, there have been many campaigns in the north-east for the return of the gospels. I pay tribute to the Lindisfarne gospels campaign and Richard Burg-Rust, who organised a rally in London on the day after St. Cuthbert's day this year—I had the pleasure of speaking to the rally at the British library—and a petition of 5,000 north-easterners that was presented to No. 10.

I also mention the campaign led by Councillor John McCormack and the North of England Assembly of Local Authorities, which has managed to secure agreement in principle for the temporary return of the Lindisfarne gospels to the north-east for the millennium, with a digital version to which people, scholars and students alike, will have access—they will be able to study these great works of Christian literature. Last but not least, I also pay tribute to the Bishop of Durham, who led a debate in another place last Thursday—he, too, has been a strong supporter. I commend the efforts of all those people.

I believe that the Government have made serious and strong attempts in the past 10 months to recognise the crucial role that the regions will play in the nation's future. They have rightly done so on economic grounds, but I do not think that it would be incompatible to do so on the grounds of culture and identity.

I believe that the Bill would ensure that the culture and identity of the northern region of England would flourish as a result of the return of the gospels, which are a potent symbol of the north-east. It is a north-east which is equally proud of its history and confident about its future. The return of the gospels would send a message from the House that the United Kingdom is a nation of different regions. One of its great strengths is its diversity. People would recognise that if the Bill were presented today.

I realise that some hon. Members will argue against the return of the gospels. I fundamentally disagree with that argument. I respect the view of those who advance the argument, but I disagree with it.

There are many examples of national collections. The Tate gallery and the Victoria and Albert museum both have sites in parts of Britain other than London, at which 366 national treasures can be displayed. I do not believe that the relocation of national treasure in any way diminishes the significance of the object or objects. That happens only if we define the nation as existing only within the M25.

Before anyone shouts about the Elgin marbles—they are often referred to when I raise the case of the gospels—I would point out that, contrary to popular belief, the north-east is an integral part of the United Kingdom, not a foreign.land. There are fundamental differences between the marbles and the gospels.

I believe also that where we locate and how we display national treasures are important considerations. It is important that our treasures can be seen properly and enjoyed by millions of people. Currently, the gospels are located in a room somewhere between King's Cross and St. Pancras stations. I do not think that that location does them the justice they deserve.

The Bill deliberately does not specify a location. However, it has been suggested to me that there are many locations in the north-east where they could be displayed in a much better setting. I am sure that the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) will agree when I refer to the mystical magic of Lindisfarne and Holy Island, where I spend my holidays. It would be a tremendous setting for the gospels.

There is also the peninsula, as it were, of the River Wear, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for City of Durham (Mr. Steinberg). It is a world heritage site. Within that peninsula is a dramatic and impressive castle, and a cathedral where the bones of St. Cuthbert lie. I think that few in the House would argue that a room in north London, an area not renowned for its panoramic views, could be in any way a better setting for the gospels than the two places I have described. There are many more suitable sites. A return of the gospels would give a tremendous boost to the identity of the north-east, and to its economy through tourism.

The Bill also provides for necessary safeguards. I am extremely conscious that the gospels are great treasures of the nation. I am sure that no Member of this place would want to see anything happen to them that potentially could damage them. Access for the experts, housing and upkeep must be properly provided. If those things cannot be done properly, I would not want to see the gospels leave their current position. However, I am confident that the north-east could provide the safeguards we require.

I referred to access by technology. If the gospels were to return to the north-east, there would still be access by means of the digital version that I mentioned. Scholars throughout the world could study them, as well as those who honour them.

I do not accept that London would somehow become a cultural desert if the gospels were to return to the ancient kingdom of Northumbria. The problem with London is that it has too many things to see. Visitors to our great capital will often comment that London is brimming with works of art, great treasures and many other attractions. I commend the Bill to the House.

§ Mr. Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham)

I congratulate the hon. Member for Houghton and Washington, East (Mr. Kemp) on introducing his Bill. 367 There is nothing personal in my opposing it. I have nothing against the north-east region of England, even though I represent a Sussex constituency. I have nothing against the Lindisfarne gospels as a student of archaeology. Indeed, they are such an important work that they should be seen in their best context. I also have nothing against the sterling work that the hon. Gentleman is doing in the "Free Deirdre" campaign. I certainly do not want my opposition to be seen as a slur on the work that he has carried out on that.

The problem is that what the hon. Gentleman is trying to do is just wrong. This is not fiction. It is real life. I speak as a long-standing member of the British Museum Society. The Bill will set a bad precedent, which would ultimately threaten the integrity of national museums across the world.

As the hon. Gentleman acknowledged, the real importance of the Lindisfarne gospels is not as some treasure or priceless artefact that is nice to look at, but as an important illuminated manuscript in the context of early Christian literature, and an important milestone in the spread of Christianity in the dark ages across the whole of Britain, not just the north-east of England, or Holy Island.

Not all the manuscript's origins are even in the north-east of England. As the hon. Gentleman said, many of the illuminations were crafted in Ireland. The Lindisfarne gospels are notable for their combination of Celtic decoration with classical and byzantine styles, so, although they may have been collated in Lindisfarne in the seventh century, other parts of the British Isles may have an equal claim to them.

The Lindisfarne gospels are undoubtedly special, but they should not be the only item claimed by the north-east of England. What about the treasures in the British museum? What else is important to the north-east? When will the north-east ask for the Vindolanda tablets to be returned to Northumberland? What about returning the Sutton Hoo treasures or the Mildenhall silver to the people of East Anglia? What about the return of the Hinton St. Mary mosaic to Dorset, or the return of Lindow man to Cheshire?

Before we know it, our national galleries, museums and libraries will become warehouses for empty showcases and a hotch-potch of unloved, second-tier artefacts that fail to titillate the tourists hankering after the in-your-face buzz so beloved of the creators of cool Britannia.

To use that awful word, this is all about "decontextualising". To decontextualise is to turn treasures of national and international importance into objects just to be gawped at. They are best seen in collections that recognise no arbitrary boundaries of time or place.

The Lindisfarne gospels are best seen in a national and international context. Indeed, if displayed in the likes of an internationally renowned institution such as the British library—not the British museum, as the hon. Gentleman suggested—they would provide the finest advertisement for the arts of the north-east of England, for all our nation and all other nations to see, seven days a week and free for all, for as long as the Government failed to admit that they had reneged on their promise to provide free admission to our national museums, with their woefully inadequate £2 million in the Budget.

368 It is ironic that the hon. Gentleman should attempt to denude the British library of one of its most successful exhibits, just when it is about to be displayed, on 21 April, in the new exhibition galleries on the St. Pancras site, which has had £511 million lavished on it. That is a funny way to laud the opening of this important new building. The British library attracts many people at the moment, and will, I hope, attract many hundreds of thousands more.

The hon. Gentleman mentioned the access that people from the north-east—indeed, anywhere in the country—will have through the agreement between the British library and Northumberland county council, and the electronic viewing facilities. Let us take the example of the British museum.

I have campaigned long and hard for the Elgin marbles to stay where they are. Some 1.6 million paying people visit the Acropolis in Athens each year. More than 6 million people are freely admitted to the British museum each year, where they can see the Elgin marbles as a centrepiece and in a magnificent and classical context, whereas fewer than half a million people a year visit Durham cathedral, which was one of the locations that the hon. Gentleman suggested for the Lindisfarne gospels. The British museum generously lends out thousands of items around the world each year. Currently, there is a collection of Indian art in Bombay to celebrate the 50th anniversary of independence, and a collection of Hogarth prints is in New York. The British museum and the British library successfully raise many millions of pounds from the private sector.

The Lindisfarne gospels are not in the British museum—the Bill is a flawed Bill. They have been and will be housed in the British library. There would also need to be a change—the hon. Gentleman did not touch on this—to the British Library Act 1972 to enable the gospels to be relocated. More important than anything else, it is an act of philistinism to remove important works of art and antiquities from their wider context—the rich tapestry of our heritage and cultural development—just to put them on a pedestal.

As the hon. Gentleman himself said, the Lindisfarne gospels are a treasure of the nation. It would set a bad precedent and spell the beginning of the end for the integrity of national museums everywhere if the gospels were removed. This is another example of the insidious consequences of regionalism gone mad. Ironically, it was The Guardian which once stated, in the context of the Elgin marbles, that demanding their return happened regularly in Athens—once a year in normal circumstances, and twice a year in election years. I trust that this does not mark the beginning of similar claims from other hon. Members for all manner of items of local interest to be stripped from our national museums.

It is with the greatest of respect to the hon. Gentleman that I oppose this Bill, so that the Lindisfarne gospels can be retained in London. It is also with the greatest respect that I suggest that he concentrate on freeing Deirdre.