Below are links to posts on L&RUK relating to “contested heritage”, a phrase of which it has been noted “in itself causes unease because the contested nature confirms that it is the heritage of two or more parties, albeit from different perspectives” *.

• And finally…II, Law and religion round-up – 13th June, Hartlepool’s monkey statue given explanatory sign, (13 June 2021).
• Contested heritage: Reverend John Newton (1725-1807), Case Note on Re St Peter and St Paul Olney [2021] ECC Oxf 2,  (29 May 2021).
• “Contested heritage” again, Round-up item on removal of the statue of Cecil Rhodes from the Rhodes Building, Oriel College, (23 May 2021).
• Church of England guidance on “contested heritage”, Review of CofE Guidance Contested Heritage in Cathedrals and Churches, (11 May 2021).
• Research at Bristol Cathedral, (scroll down), Round-up item on Research Partner for audit of the Cathedral monuments, (9 May 2021).
• “Contested heritage”, the Charity Commission and the National Trust, Round-up item, (14 March 2021).
• “Contested heritage” and offensive inscriptions: Re St Margaret Rottingdean (2), Review of Re St Margaret, Rottingdean (No. 2) [2021] ECC Chi 1.  (4 February 2021).
• “Contested heritage” and listing statues: new proposals from MHCLG, (19 January 2021).
• Of graves, headstones and “offensive” inscriptions: Re St Margaret’s Rottingdean, Review of in Re St Margaret Rottingdean [2020] ECC Chi 4, (14 June 2020).

* IHBC response to Consultation on Historic England’s draft Guidance on dealing with Contested Heritage, (16 February 2018). 

Last updated, 14 June at  07:05.