Register here - as a registered user you get more features and fewer ads.
Paul Smith
The Scottish Executive Consents & Emergency Planning Unit
2nd Floor Meridian Court
5 Cadogan Street
Glasgow G2 6AT
Dear Mr Smith
Re: Proposed windfarm development, Lewis
We understand that a windfarm of 133 towers has been proposed for a highland site on the Isle of Lewis, and we wish to express our concern about this project from a local heritage perspective.
The proposed site, we understand, will be on a range of hills known locally as 'The Old Woman of the Moors' or the 'Sleeping Beauty'. This range of hills, comprising Sidhean nan Airgid, Guainemol and Mor Mhonadh, is distinguished by its remarkable resemblance, when viewed at a distance, to a recumbent woman - hence its local nickname. The view is particularly well appreciated from the stone circle of Callanish, one of the island's prime heritage sites as well as an archaeological site of world importance.
It has become abundantly clear that the megalithic and other remains of prehistory were not simply self-contained sites, but referred to and incorporated the surrounding landscape in their overall design narrative, paying especially attention to surrounding horizons. Anthropomorphic simulacra appear to have had a significant meaning at ritual sites from Japan to Egypt to Europe and the British Isles.
It is therefore highly likely that 'the old woman' viewed from Callanish and elsewhere on the island is not a quaint local quirk of imagination and folklore, but a perception that has persisted on the island as long as humans have lived there, and indeed since the construction of the stone circle. As such, the profile of the mountain is likely to have been an integral part of the ancient sacred and ritual landscape of Lewis, and thus a crucial element of its modern heritage too. Any modification of the skyline, by wind towers or other buildings, will inevitably be to the detriment of the profile of the Sleeping Beauty, and accordingly to the detriment of local amenity.
Local amenity should also be taken to include the significant folklore of the island's community. The folklore of place is a vital and integrative component of a community's relationship with its locale, and should not be treated lightly. The degradation of a community's inheritance in such a way by outside interests, as would be manifested by the position of this windfarm, would affect community identity and perception, and may lead to resentment. Would any company or development office choose to be known as the people who killed off the Sleeping Beauty?
A further archaeological point related to Callanish and arguing against this development occurs during the Moon's 18.6-year standstill cycle; the Sleeping Beauty plays a part at its major southern standstill, when the moon appears to rise out of 'her' legs, and creep low along the body to hang low over 'her' breasts, throat and face, subsequently disappearing and then reappearing within the stone circle at the foot of the central megalith. This lunar rhythm has been demonstrated to have been understood by the megalith builders and incorporated into the plans of other ritual sites in Scotland especially. The majesty and meaning of this spectacle - next due in 2006 - would, like the other points made above, be severely impaired by wind towers.
The above arguments would recommend the case for refusing this windfarm development, or at least denying the towers from any location that would modify the skyline from any prehistoric site, from archaeological and folklore perspectives, and both of these would also contribute to a major case against the development from a scenic perspective. Certain landscapes have unique features that should guarantee their preservation for generations to come, and this range of hills is one such.
The need for renewable energy is undeniable, and our objection to this plan should not be taken as opposition to the principle of wind energy, especially if such energy production can be of benefit to local communities. It is arguable whether the main financial benefactor of this rather oversized scheme would be Lewis residents - who would actually lose a significant intangible benefit - or a remote energy corporation. Indeed, if the development affects the scenic, archaeological and loric aspects of Lewis' heritage, as seems likely, it is hard for us to believe that the loss to the islanders would not be rather more than intangible.
We look forward to the proper rejection of this proposal, and thank you for your attention to wider matters of concern over our precious inheritance of acculturated landscapes.
Yours sincerely,
John Billingsley
Editor, Northern Earth
Something is not right. This message is just to keep things from messing up down the road