TheWestminster Stone theory is the belief held by some historians and scholars that the stone which traditionally rests under theCoronation Chair is not the trueStone of Destiny but a 13th-century substitute. Since the chair has been located inWestminster Abbey since that time, adherents to this theory have created the title 'Westminster Stone' to avoid confusion with the 'real' stone (sometimes referred to as theStone of Scone).

One of the most vocal proponents of this theory was writer and historianNigel Tranter, who consistently presented the theory throughout hisnon-fiction books andhistorical novels. Other historians have held this view, includingJames S. Richardson, who was anInspector of Ancient Monuments in the mid-twentieth century. Richardson produced a monograph on the subject.^[1]

The Stone of Destiny was the traditional Coronation Stone of the Kings of Scotland and, before that, the Kings ofDál Riata. Legends associate it withSaint Columba, who might have brought it from Ireland as a portable altar.^[2] In AD 574, the Stone was used as a coronation chair when Columba anointed and crownedAedan as the King of Dál Riata.

The Stone of Destiny was kept by the monks ofIona, the traditional headquarters of the Scottish Celtic church, until Viking raiding caused them to move to the mainland, first toDunkeld,Atholl, and then toScone. Here it continued to be used in coronations, as a symbol of Scottish Kingship.

In his attempts toconquer Scotland,Edward I of England invaded in 1296 at the head of an army. SackingBerwick, beating the Scots atDunbar, and laying siege toEdinburgh Castle, Edward then proceeded toScone, intending to take the Stone of Destiny, which was kept atScone Abbey. He had already taken theScottish regalia from Edinburgh, which includedSaint Margaret'sBlack Rood relic, but to confiscate an object so precious to the Scots, and so symbolic of their independence, would be a final humiliation. He carried it back toWestminster Abbey. By placing it within the throne ofEngland, he had a potent symbol of his claim for overlordship. It is this stone which sat in Westminster until 1996, when it was returned to Scotland.

According to the Westminster Stone theory, the stone Edward removed was not the real Stone of Destiny, but a substitute. The English army was at the Scottish border in mid-March, 1296, and did not reach Scone until June. With three months to anticipate Edward's arrival, there was ample time and incentive for a switch to be made, in order to protect the original relic. Such a substitution could have been instigated by theAbbot of Scone, who stood as custodian. The 'Stone of Destiny' could therefore have been transported to a place of safety, and Edward tricked with a different piece of sandstone.

There are many theories regarding the possible resting place of the 'True Stone' since, inspired by logical deduction and, in some cases, fantastical, wishful thinking.

Nigel Tranter believed the True Stone was originally hidden by the Abbot of Scone, and eventually entrusted to the care ofAonghus Óg Mac Domhnaill, byRobert the Bruce. Aonghus Óg hid it in his nativeHebrides, where the stone probably remains.^[3]

One legend records that after the True Stone was given into the keeping of Aonghus Óg, its keepership passed into the branch of the clan who settled inSleat. A descendant of this line, C. Iain Alasdair MacDonald, wrote to Tranter, claiming he was now the custodian of the Stone, which was hidden onSkye.^[4]

• The Westminster Stone is a lump of roughly-dressed sandstone, of proportions appropriate for use in building. As such, it is not remarkable or unique, or impressive. The only unusual thing about it is the presence of an iron hoop inserted in each top end, suitable for carrying on a pole.
• Edward I would not have been tricked by anything newly-hewn, but a piece long-since rejected by builders would look suitably ancient, especially if abandoned outside and consequently weathered. That the Westminster Stone has a fault (weak point) is demonstrated by the fact it broke in half when removed from Westminster Abbey in 1950.
• The Westminster Stone is certainly not the stone of Iona mentioned in early documents and traditions. Geologists confirm that the Stone is 'lowerOld Red Sandstone' and was quarried in the vicinity of Scone.^[5]
• Early seals and documentary descriptions suggest a stone that is larger than the Westminster Stone, darker in colour (possibly basalt or marble), with elaborate carvings.^{[citation needed]} And it might have been retrieved because a letter to the editor of theMorning Chronicle, dated 2 January 1819, states:

On the 19th of November, as the servants belonging to the West Mains of Dunsinane-house, were employed in carrying away stones from the excavation made among the ruins that point out the site of Macbeth's castle here, part of the ground they stood on suddenly gave way, and sank down about six feet, discovering a regularly built vault, about six feet long and four wide. None of the men being injured, curiosity induced them to clear out the subterranean recess, when they discovered among the ruins a large stone, weighing about 500l [230 kg]. which is pronounced to be of the meteoric or semi-metallic kind. This stone must have lain here during the long series of ages since Macbeth's reign. Besides it were also found two round tablets, of a composition resembling bronze. On one of these two lines are engraved, which a gentleman has thus deciphered.— 'The sconce (or shadow) of kingdom come, until Sylphs in air carry me again to Bethel.' These plates exhibit the figures of targets for the arms. [...] The curious here, aware of such traditions, and who have viewed these venerable remains of antiquity, agree that Macbeth may, or rather must, have deposited the stone in question at the bottom of his Castle, on the hill of Dunsinane (from the trouble of the times), where it has been found by the workmen. This curious stone has been shipped for London for the inspection of the scientific amateur, in order to discover its real quality.^[6]

• There is no record to show the Scots ever requested the return of the Westminster Stone in the century after its departure, which they would have done if it were an important relic. The absence of a request is quite marked in theTreaty of Northampton.^{[citation needed]} The Scots had been harrying England for some years, and in 1328 the English sued for peace. The Treaty is drawn in Scotland's favour, for they were in the position to make demands. The Treaty stipulates the return of theScottish regalia and St Margaret'sBlack Rood, but there is no mention of the Stone of Scone.^[5] Tranter states that the English offered to return the stone, but the Scots were not interested.^[7]

The Westminster Stone theory is not accepted by many historians, or those responsible for the care of the Stone. There are many strong arguments against the theory.

• If Edward I did not remove the true stone, yet claimed to have done so, the Scots' easiest refutation of his claims would be to produce the True Stone. However, there is no record of them doing so.
• Hiding the stone might have been a sensible precaution while the English remained a threat, but it was never produced once the threat was removed.
• Despite its importance as a symbol of Kingship, the stone was not used for subsequent coronations, which it surely would have if still in Scottish possession.
• Legends and theories abound, but no proof has been found to indicate there is another stone.
• If there was warning enough of Edward's intention to remove the Stone, why were the other regalia, documents and Black Rood not hidden also?
• A number of English knights attended the coronation of KingJohn of Scotland only a few years earlier, and would have seen the true stone, but none of them told Edward that his stone was a fake.
• On studying the Stone in 1996, after its return to Scotland, nine periods of workmanship were identified on the Stone's faces, as well as recognisable erosion between the features, which proves it is an ancient artefact.^[8]
• Edward had followers from the Scottish nobility who would also have been able to verify the stone's authenticity.
• Dunsinane Hill has the remains of a late prehistorichill fort, and this has historical associations with Macbeth, but no remains dating to the 11th century have been identified on the hill.^[9]

On Christmas Day 1950, the Westminster Stone was taken from the abbey by four Scottish students. It remained hidden until April 1951, when a stone was left inArbroath Abbey. Some speculate that this stone is not the one taken from the Abbey, but merely a copy.

The stone left in Arbroath was damaged, for the Westminster Stone had broken in half when removed from the Coronation Chair, but had been repaired byGlasgow stonemason Robert Gray. However, Gray had made replicas of the Stone in the 1930s, and further fuelled speculation by declaring later that he did not know which stone had been sent back to London as "there were so many copies lying around".^[10]

This scenario receives support from a plaque placed in St Columba's Parish Church inDundee, which claims to mark the site of the 'Stone of Scone', given to them in 1972 by 'Baillie Robert Gray'.

The apparent disrespect shown towards the Stone by Gray and the students is explained byNigel Tranter, who had some claim to knowledge, as the students asked him to act as an intermediary after the removal of the stone. Tranter later stated that Gray inserted a note inside the Westminster Stone, when repairing it, to the effect that it was 'a block of Old Red Sandstone of no value to anyone',^[10] although other reports state that Gray never revealed what the note said.^[11]

However, in the 1940s, the British Geological Survey, had carried out a survey of the Stone when the Coronation Chair was undergoing conservation work. The fault line had been noticed as well as the many marks and features of the Stone's surface. This allowed verification of the authenticity of the returned item.^[8]

A scanray examination conducted by the Home OfficePolice Scientific Development Branch in 1973 confirmed the presence of 'three metal rods and sockets, one being at right angles to the other two'. This also indicated that the repaired Westminster Stone, not a replica, had been returned.^[12]

• Nigel Tranter,Scots Magazine, 1960

• Political history of Scotland
• Wars of Scottish Independence
• Westminster Abbey
• Scottish royalty
• Stones
• 13th century in Scotland
• Stone of Scone
• Theories of history

• Articles with short description
• Short description matches Wikidata
• Use dmy dates from May 2018
• Use British English from May 2018
• All Wikipedia articles written in British English
• All articles with unsourced statements
• Articles with unsourced statements from January 2010