Stone of Destiny?

[Chookie]

The lump of Perthshire sandstone which, for centuries, has been referred to as the Stone of Destiny, the Stone of Scone or the Coronation Stone is a fake. The physical descriptions of the two stones are so different as to make it clear that this is so.

The true Stone of destiny has been described by contemporary writers as being variously - “shaped as a chair”, “a shining stone”, as being “of black marble” and as having carvings upon it. It is described by one writer as being 17 inches (43cm) high, 18 inches (46cm) deep, 32 inches wide (81cm) and made of shining stone. Most contemporary reports refer to it a marble which is from the Greek “Marmoris” which was a generic name for shining stone.

A contemporary account by a Walter Hemingford, a canon of Guisborough Priory in Yorkshire says “Apud Monasterium de Scone positus eat lapis pergrandis in ecclesia Dei, juxta manum altare, concavus quidam ad modum rotundae catherdeaie confectus, in quo future reges loco quasi coronatis.”

Or, “In the monastery of Scone, in the church of God, near to the high altar, is kept a large stone, hollowed out as a round chair, on which their kings were placed for their ordination, according to custom,”

The stone which was under the “British” throne is described by the Royal Commission On Historical Monuments, London as “A quarry dressed block of coarse grained old red sandstone measuring 26½ inches (67cm) by16½ inches (42cm) by 11 inches (28cm) thick. On it is a roughly incised cross, and an oblong indentation. It is fitted at the ends with iron staples, carrying rings which are so attached that a pole can easily be passed through them to facilitate carrying it. These cuttings are probably of the time of Edward 1.”
Given that these descriptions are so different, is it not at least possible that the stone which was removed from Scone Abbey in 1296 CE was a fake?

It is certainly not the case that the arrival of the English soldiers at Scone was a surprise to the monks. The soldiers of the English invasion force had spent months burning, raping, pillaging and stealing before they arrived at Scone and word of their coming went ahead of them. It is surely not outwith the bounds of possibility that the monks prepared a false stone for the English to steal.

Although John Balliol was the last King of Scots recorded as being enthroned on the Stone of Destiny, and Longshanks (Edward I of England) attended the ceremony, he could not have seen the actual stone as this was, according to record, covered in rich cloths.

There is a belief prevalent in Scotland that the Stone of Destiny never left Scotland. But if this is the case, where is it and, more importantly, does it matter? Personally, I believe that it never left Scotland. Thus, it was not stolen in 1296, it was not liberated on Christmas Eve 1951, the stone which was brought back to Scotland at that time was, indeed copied (more than once), one of those copies may or may not have been “returned” to the British government. That stone may have been “returned” to Scotland on St. Andrews Day 1996.

Strangely, when it was "returned", the vast majority of Scots were seriously underwhelmed...

Also strangely, the Scots never, at any time, demanded the return of the Stone stolen from Scone Abbey (supposedly their holiest relic)......

[spot]

I remember trying my hand at translating Walter Hemingford's Latin ages ago, trying to get a grasp of what happened. I'm quite sure you're right that the one-time component of the throne in Westminster Abbey wasn't the Stone of Destiny but it's got a history of its own regardless. It would be satisfying to read a coherent account of all the stones and the reasons for their existence but that's a lot to ask for.

[Nomad]

Does it look like this ? I know where it is.