The National Bird of Britain

After a poll of nearly a quarter of a million votes, the robin is now officially Britain’s national bird. 

The National Bird Vote saw the robin take 34% of the votes, followed by the barn owl and the blackbird, at 12% and 11% respectively.

Birder and organiser of the poll, David Lindo, claimed the robin’s bullish and territorial, yet chirpy nature is why Britain has voted for the robin as the country’s national bird. Our familiarity with the robin could also be why it was so popular, Grahame Madge, RSPB spokesman, says that wherever you are in Britain the robin “is only a flutter away from our footsteps, [it’s] a worthy winner”.

Another obvious factor at play is the robin’s presence in British culture. Christmas and robins seem to go hand-in-hand as they feature on cards, in carols and even gave their name to the red-coated Victorian postmen that delivered Christmas cards. The robin also has religious associations; legend suggests that the robin flew to Jesus at his crucifixion and is forever marked with Christ’s blood on its chest. It’s distinctive red breast has obviously endeared itself to the nation.

Although the robin deserves its place as the national bird due to its distinctive characteristics and historical significance, some critics of the robin’s new title say that the position of national bird should be used to spearhead a conservation movement for the species or national wildlife. The robin’s position as national bird of Britain deprives other lesser known, more endangered birds of recognition and aid. Furthermore, robins and their nests are already fully protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

However, the nature of the poll, leaving the British public to decide, would possibly increase the chances of well-known birds winning the title. In a separate poll at Knowsley Safari Park, 500 children under 15 were asked to identify the shortlist by their photographs. The results show that only a third of the children believed that all were actually British. One notable member of the shortlist was the Hen Harrier, which came ninth out of the shortlist. It is regarded as the most heavily persecuted bird in Britain and is targeted by gamekeepers and a raised platform would certainly be a step towards a Defra act to end its persecution.

In other countries, the Philippine eagle was declared a national bird to highlight its difficulties, the scarlet macaw was declared the national bird of Honduras in 1993 in a bid to raise awareness of the varied wildlife in the country and the ‘Near Threatened’ resplendent quetzal, the national bird of Guatemala was considered sacred both in Mayan culture and by the conquistadors.

Therefore, although the robin has a rich history within British culture, more could be done to conserve British wildlife. One way in which this could be done is through the nomination of birds of the year. Since 1995, The Estonian Ornithological society selects birds of the year to encourage interest and conservation activities. Estonia’s bird of the year for 2015 is the buzzard, which means the population is monitored, live webcams focus on breeding pairs and constant updates go up on their website, which helps to raise awareness of the species. All of this is done whilst also retaining their national bird, the Barn Swallow. Annual projects such as this would provide extensive information for a wide range of birds that would benefit from conservation.

Maintaining Britain’s national bird as the robin would capture the British spirit and confirm its historical cultural significance, however, the bird of the year would help raise the profile of the less familiar species and help bring in legislation to protect them.  

This post was written by Andrew Taylor, an NTU Masters student in Museum and Heritage Management and a Culture Syndicates Heritage Assistant.

Museums during war and peace: Places of protection and destruction

There are many museum exhibitions now that focus on war - depicting how nations, groups and individuals are affected by conflict, how they have remembered the devastation and how they have commemorated these events. However, over the past few weeks while one heritage site has been attacked another has reopened after 12 years - both during the current conflict in Iraq. It is intended here to examine how museums have been affected and how they have reacted to wartime circumstances by concentrating on WWI, WWII and current struggles. It can be argued that museums have played four roles during wartime conditions; they have been subjected to lootings and damage, they have been forced to close to safeguard their collections, but museums have also produced ‘patriotic exhibitions’ to inspire the nation and consequently exhibited works that have alienated other people.

With the outbreak of WWI ‘the very purpose and worth of museums in society [was] tested and met a response as diverse as the institutions themselves’. Gaynor Kavanagh has suggested that ‘some museums [in Britain] were able to adapt and support the war effort through ‘‘patriotic exhibitions’ and educational work’. These exhibitions were created to inspire men to enlist while encouraging those left at home to work towards victory. However, national museums closed during this period, which is highlighted by Kavanagh who expresses that ‘this was not done through concern for the safety of collections, but as a political gesture, a public example of economy during wartime’. Therefore, museums during WWI were to some extent connected to the war effort because their exhibitions encouraged the nation to believe in itself and closures symbolised how museums helped support the troubled economy at the time.

If we consider WWII with particular focus on museums in Nazi Germany the story of how museums are affected and react during war takes a different route. The Nazis created exhibitions that were only open to visits by ‘high-ranking SS officials’, which displayed the ideology that the Aryan race was superior to the Jewish race. These exhibitions were ‘arranged by the staff and presenting a selection of exquisite material objects owned by those murdered in the camps at that very time’. Sabine Offe, continues to state that ‘the staff – the Jewish archivists, librarians, architects, and art-historians were themselves deported one by one’. Similar to the examples of the WWI exhibitions they were designed to evoke nationalism however they did this by force by expelling or deporting Jewish people, who had up until the rise of the Nazis, considered themselves and were considered by others to be German nationals. Also as well as creating exhibitions that were influenced by the party’s beliefs the Nazis were ‘systematic campaign[s] to loot and plunder art from Jews and others in the occupied countries’. As previously stated museums are places of ‘salvage’ but during conflicts they also become places of conflict where the protection of their collections are threatened.

Debates were raised a few weeks ago at the British Museum which was ‘turned into a temporary court’ that discussed ‘the alleged illegal trading of an ancient Libyan statue valued at £1.5m’. As current conflicts in Iraq and Syria continue there is a growing necessity to protect museum’s collections. This has been emphasised by the need for an international conference at the V&A on the 14th April entitled ‘Culture in Conflict’. The main questions that have been asked are ‘what is the role of museums? Can we support people from these countries, whilst ensuring our own protection?’ Peter Stone, the chairman of the UK National Committee of the Blue Shield, has also raised the issue that advocates for the protection of cultural heritage in conflict zones. Evidently museums that are currently facing conflict are struggling to protect their cultural heritage. However, the museums as well as an international audience have concluded that they have a responsibility to act – lessons have been learnt after WWI and WWII but it has proved difficult to create a complete plan to protect museum objects during conflicts. On the other hand, there has been greater attention given to the looting of museums through heightened media coverage.

This post was written by Amy Williams. Amy is currently undertaking an internship at Culture Syndicates and studying for her MA in Holocaust and Related Studies at Nottingham Trent University. She is blogging about her experiences with Culture Syndicates on their Linked In page: http://linkd.in/1Mqo46v