Archaeologists from the United Kingdom discovered graffiti by British punk band Sex Pistols on the walls of the flat the band rented in London in the mid-1970s, according to a press release from University of York.
Dr. John Schofield of the University of York and independent researcher Dr Paul Graves-Brown suggest that the intact Sex Pistols graffiti may be of greater significance than the discovery of early Beatles recordings.
Johnny Rotten's graffiti (University of York)
The authors of a paper in the latest issue of the journal Antiquity say the graffiti found behind cupboards in the property in Denmark Street in London is “a direct and powerful representation of a radical and dramatic movement of rebellion”.
Denmark Street became notorious for its links to popular culture in the 1950s and 1960s, as it was the locale where many songwriters and publishers were based. In the 1960s, the Rolling Stones recorded their first album at a studio on the street; in the 1970s, the street’s place in rock ‘n’ roll history was sealed when the Sex Pistols moved in. Today the street is home to London’s largest concentration of music shops. The flat where the Sex Pistols once lived is currently used as offices.
The researchers photographed and made a complete digitised tracing of the graffiti. Most of it is attributable to lead singer John Lydon, better known by the former stage name Johnny Rotten. It consists of eight cartoons depicting himself and his band members, as well as their manager at the time, Malcolm McLaren, and other people associated with the band.
Dr. Schofield comments on the findings: ‘The tabloid press once claimed that early Beatles recordings discovered at the BBC were the most important archaeological find since Tutankhamun’s tomb. The Sex Pistols’ graffiti in Denmark Street surely ranks alongside this and – to our minds – usurps it.’
The next question for the researchers is whether such an unconventional heritage finding should be treated and preserved in the same way as a more traditional artefact. The team believes that their site can be described as ‘anti-heritage’, as it contradicts with what heritage practitioners typically value or wish to keep safe.
