4. Memorandum submitted by the Council
for British Archaeology on behalf of the Standing Conference on
Portable Antiquities
STATUS
1. The Standing Conference on Portable Antiquities
is a delegate body including representatives of all the main British
archaeological bodies with a concern for portable antiquities
(a list of members is appended as an annex to this memorandum).
Convened by the Council for British Archaeology, it usually meets
annually and is supported by the CBA's Portable Antiquities Working
Group which meets more regularly and acts as the executive arm
of the Standing Conference. Both bodies are chaired by Dr P V
Addyman CBE, former Director of York Archaeological Trust and
this memorandum has been compiled by the CBA's Working Group on
behalf of the Standing Conference.
2. The Standing Conference was established
in 1995 to discuss issues of concern to British archaeologists
about how activities relating to recovery, reporting and trade
in portable antiquities affect the conservation and management
of the wider cultural heritage and people's interest in it. Over
the years it has concerned itself with the Treasure Act; the Portable
Antiquities Recording Scheme; European regulations on the import
and export of antiquities; underwater finds of portable antiquities;
the incidence of metal detecting and numerous other subjects.
Recently it has noted with increasing concern the growth of the
illicit trade in antiquities and has made representations to the
Department for Culture, Media and Sport on a number of occasions
with the recommendation that the United Kingdom Government should
adopt various international instruments designed to combat this
trade—notably the 1970 UNESCO Convention and the 1995 UNIDROIT
Convention.
3. The Standing Conference gave evidence
to the Committee's previous enquiry on the Illicit Trade in 2000
and submitted a memorandum at the time. Several members of the
Illicit Trade Advisory Panel are also active in the Standing Conference
(Dr Peter Addyman, Lord Renfrew and Dr Roger Bland) and this memorandum
reflects their views. In addition this memorandum includes reference
to three resolutions, on Iraq, the Hague Conventions and the Portable
Antiquities Scheme (quoted below), which were agreed at its last
meeting on 27 June 2003.
4. This memorandum is limited to the first
and third of the three areas that the Committee wishes to cover
in its present enquiry: progress on the recommendations on the
Committee's Report on Cultural Property in July 2000 (session
1999-2000, 7th Report) and on the recommendations on the Report
of the Illicit Trade Advisory Panel (December 2000) and on Iraq.
The second area of interest, that of human remains and spoliated
art, falls outside the Standing Conference's area of expertise.
5. On Iraq, the Standing Conference fully
endorses the points made in the memorandum submitted by Dr Harriett
Crawford on behalf of the British School of Archaeology in Iraq
and wishes to draw the Committee's attention to a resolution on
the subject which was agreed at a meeting of the Standing Conference
on 27 June.
PROGRESS ON
THE RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE
CULTURE, MEDIA
AND SPORT
COMMITTEE'S
REPORT ON
CULTURAL PROPERTY
(JULY 2000) AND
ON THE
REPORT OF
THE ILLICIT
TRADE ADVISORY
PANEL (DECEMBER
2000)
6. The Standing Conference believes that
it is essential to keep at the forefront of any discussion of
these issues the fact that the damage caused by the looting of
sites to recover antiquities for sale in the international market
is one of the principal causes of destruction of the archaeological
resource in the world today. Although the damage principally affects
sites abroad, there is also a significant problem of looting of
archaeological sites within the UK, and there is undoubtedly a
significant trade in such looted antiquities. London is one of
the biggest centres of the art and antiquities market.
7. The Standing Conference welcomes the
actions taken by the Government so far in this area, notably:
— the establishment of the Advisory
Panel on the Illicit Trade;
— acceptance of the 1970 UNESCO Convention;
— the support given to the Private
Member's Bill on Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences);
— the extension of the definition of
Treasure under the Treasure Act 1996 and updating of its associated
code of practice; and
— support to the Portable Antiquities
Scheme.
However, despite these developments, much work
remains to be done on the recommendations of the two committees
and we wish to highlight the following areas where further progress
is needed or new cases or events have reinforced the need for
action.
PUBLIC EDUCATION
8. One of the UK's obligations as a state
party to the UNESCO Convention is "to endeavour by educational
means to create and develop in the public mind a realisation of
the value of cultural property and the threat to the cultural
heritage created by theft, clandestine excavations and illicit
exports". The Standing Conference believes that a sustained
and effective campaign of public education on these issues, funded
by the Government, is likely to have more impact than any other
single measure. We would urge that this should become a matter
of some urgency following the passage of the Dealing in Cultural
Objects (Offences) Bill. Aside from our treaty obligations, this
campaign will be doubly necessary if the Dealing in Cultural Objects
(Offences) Bill does obtain Royal Assent this autumn. This will
require a culture change among all those who participate in the
market in cultural goods, especially antiquities and it is essential
that all those parties who are affected by it are fully aware
of their obligations. We therefore urge the Government to ensure
that adequate resources are devoted to this purpose.
DEALING IN
CULTURAL OBJECTS
(OFFENCES) BILL
9. The Standing Conference welcomes they
support the Government has given to this Private Member's Bill
and hopes that it has a smooth passage through the House of Lords.
However, it is a matter of concern that, for constitutional reasons,
the Bill excludes Scotland from its scope. We understand that
the Scottish Executive has expressed the view that a separate,
parallel measure needs to be taken through the Scottish Parliament
but it has not announced a timetable for doing this. Assuming
the Bill does receive Royal Assent this year we would urge that
parallel legislation be introduced into the Scottish Parliament
despatch, because the absence of such legislation in Scotland
will create a dangerous loophole which will could give rise to
the creation of a market in illegally removed cultural objects
in Scotland, which could then be taken into the other parts of
the UK.
EXPORT LICENCES
10. Objects looted from abroad regularly
appear on the market in this country and are then exported abroad.
If these objects have been in this country for less than 50 years—as
will generally be the case—they are not normally referred
to the expert advisers, who are mostly the staff of the national
museums who can be expected to have some knowledge of the market
and be alert to objects that may be illegally exported (most looted
objects will fall into this category). This is an important loophole
in the Government's defences against the illicit trade.
11. Furthermore, all objects found in the
soil or the territorial waters of the UK that are more than 50
years old require a licence, regardless of their value. Nevertheless,
many archaeological objects from the UK are offered for sale on
the Internet in currencies which make it clear that they are likely
to sold abroad.
12. The Illicit Trade Advisory Panel recommended
in 2000 that checks should be carried out on cultural goods imported
into the UK within the last 50 years and that the Export Licensing
Unit at the DCMS should be strengthened. These recommendations
have not yet been implemented despite the fact that it is more
than two years since the Report was published. The Standing Conference
recommends that the Government should pay urgent attention to
this issue.
THE UK HERITAGE
OF MOVABLE
CULTURAL PROPERTY:
THE PORTABLE
ANTIQUITIES SCHEME
13. The Government's initiative (which as
prompted by CBA research into the relationship between metal detecting
and archaeology) to promote the voluntary recording of archaeological
finds made by members of the public through the Portable Antiquities
Scheme (also known as "Finding our Past"), is strongly
welcomed by us as it is transforming our understanding of the
moveable archaeological heritage in England and Wales. However,
it rests on very insecure foundations. Since 1997 the Scheme's
Finds Liaison Officers have examined over 150,000 objects, most
of which would have otherwise gone unrecorded, adding significantly
to our understanding of the archaeology and history of England
and Wales. The data generated is published on the Scheme's website—www.finds.org.uk—and
passed on to the relevant Sites and Monuments Record as the primary
source of information about the historic environment. The initiative
has widely been acknowledged as representing an important advance
in public archaeology. It helps to monitor agricultural damage,
improves community involvement in archaeology, fosters social
inclusion, and educates the less responsible metal-detectorists
who may be motivated by profit. In addition, the successful operation
of the Treasure Act clearly depends on the existence of a network
of finds liaison officers.
14. The Scheme is being rolled out across
England and Wales this year with funding from the Heritage lottery
fund, DCMS, Re:source and other partners until April 2006. At
present the (Government has made no commitment to fund the Scheme
beyond March 2006, although in her evidence to the Select Committee
on 8 July the Secretary of State made some encouraging comments.
At its meeting on 27 June, the Standing Conference on Portable
Antiquities passed the following resolution:
"The Standing Conference on Portable Antiquities
wholeheartedly welcomes the decision of the Heritage Lottery Fund
and the Government to fund for three years a national Portable
Antiquities Scheme, a total of 46 posts, but notes concern that
no guarantees have been given that this will be funded beyond
April 2006, and urges the Government to give long-term support
for the Scheme, recognising that it would be particularly dangerous
to turn the tap off once finders have been encouraged to report
their finds under the Scheme. The Conference urges that the devolved
administrations should also provide resources to provide analogous
schemes in Scotland and Northern Ireland, adapted to local conditions."
15. If the Scheme should cease to be funded
in 2006, it would have seriously detrimental consequences for
the stewardship of our archaeological heritage and would run completely
counter to the welcome advances that this Government is making
elsewhere in combating the illicit trade.
DATABASES
16. Both the Select Committee and the Illicit
Trade Advisory Panel recommended the establishment of a database
of stolen cultural property and yet no tangible progress has been
made. The Standing Conference urges the Government to redouble
its efforts to establish such a database which is urgently needed
in the light of the Government's acceptance of the UNESCO Convention
and of the likely passage of the Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences)
Bill.
LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES
17. The law enforcement agencies have a
key role in combating the illicit trade. It was apparent from
the Select Committee's inquiry in 2000 that the illicit trade
in cultural objects was not an area to which the police and HM
Customs and Excise accorded a high priority and it remains a matter
of grave concern to the Standing Conference that there is little
evidence that this has changed in the three years since. We would
draw attention to the recommendation of the Illicit Trade Advisory
Panel that there should be an art and antiques unit of the police
with a national remit. This remains an urgent priority and it
is also important that HM Customs and Excise, which will be given
additional powers under the Trading in Cultural Objects (Offences)
Bill, should accord a higher priority to stemming the illicit
trade in cultural objects.
UNDERWATER CULTURAL
HERITAGE
18. We wish to draw the attention of the
Committee to the need for consistency in how disposal of cultural
property is handled across different cultural regimes, geographies
and archaeological practice on land or at sea. The recent case
where HM Government through the Defence Disposals Agency of the
Ministry of Defence has entered a partnering agreement with a
US commercial salvage firm to recover and sell off alleged 17th
century bullion from the supposed wreck of the warship Sussex,
in international waters off Gibraltar has raised an extremely
wide range of issues of principle—especially given that
the basic intention of the deal is that the cost of the recovery
work and HMG's share in the profits should derive largely from
the sale of artefacts. The agreement is widely regarded (so far
as the secret nature of the contract and of archaeological information
from the project allows it to be ascertained), as being in substantial
contravention of all principles of archaeological best practice—despite
subsequent attempts by Government to strengthen archaeological
aspects of the proposals. This includes international criticism,
not least the General Assembly of ICOMOS. We would also draw attention
of the Committee to Mr O'Hara's Early Day motion 250, which we
fully endorse.
19. The Committee may also wish to note
that a different approach has been adopted by the DoT in developing
an international agreement to protect artefacts and other remains
on the Titanic.
20. The Sussex case shows the urgent need
for the Government to review as a matter of urgency its decision
not to ratify UNESCO's 2001 Convention on the Protection of the
Underwater Cultural Heritage, and to develop a much clearer practical
policies for implementation of the Convention in line with proper
standards for procurement of archaeological services, recovery
and disposal of "Treasure" and accounting for cultural
assets.
UNIDROIT CONVENTION
21. The Standing Conference notes that the
Select Committee in its Report of 2000 recommended that the UK
Government should sign the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention, rather than
the 1970 UNESCO Convention, but that Government, following the
advice of its Illicit Trade Advisory Panel, has in fact chosen
to become a party to the UNESCO Convention. While we welcome acceptance
of the UNESCO Convention, which we believe has the most important
role to play in combating the illicit trade in archaeological
objects and in raising public awareness, we believe that it is
also desirable that the Government should sign the UNIDROIT Convention
and introduce the necessary legislation to give effect to it.
HAGUE CONVENTION
22. The Standing Conference agreed the following
resolution at its meeting on 27 June 2003:
"Further to its previous resolution of March
2002 calling on the UK government to ratify the 1954 Hague Convention
for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed
Conflict and noting with concern that cultural property has suffered
grave and often deliberate damage and removal during recent armed
conflicts, the Standing Conference on Portable Antiquities welcomes
the Government's agreement in principle that the UK should negotiate
with a view to ratify the Convention and now calls on the Government
to set out a clear timetable for ratification for the Convention
and the First and Second Protocols to coincide with the 50th Anniversary
of the Convention in 2004".
23. We are pleased to note that DCMS and
other Government Departments have started work on these matters,
and urge that the timetable for ratification that we have called
for be published forthwith.
IRAQ
24. The Standing Conference agreed the following
resolution at its meeting on 27 June 2003:
"We the undersigned, [1]recognising
the international value of the cultural heritage for Iraq's long-term
sustainable social, cultural and economic development, and the
threat to international knowledge and Iraqi identity, note with
consternation the eyewitness evidence in different parts of Iraq
of continued systematic looting and consequential destruction
of archaeological sites and monuments, and the theft of cultural
property' from museums and archives and libraries.
We offer, within our respective competencies,
roles and available resources, further assistance, training and
capacity building to support Iraqi specialists in restoring collections
and re-establishing stable management of Iraq's cultural heritage.
We welcome measures taken so far to seek to control
trade in Iraqi antiquities, and the work of DCMS in seeking to
co-ordinate offers of assistance from the UK.
But in order for these measures to be effective
we call on both the UK and the US Governments to act URGENTLY
to:
(i)
recognise that safeguarding Iraq's
internationally renowned cultural heritage for the benefit of
all is a fundamental plank of sustainable reconstruction;
(ii)
work closely with UNESCO in providing
and co-ordinating international specialist support in response
to Iraqi requests, ensuring clear and accountable lines of responsibility
and openness in communication;
(iii)
enable Iraqi specialists, with the
support of relevant international experts as necessary, to develop
a realistic medium to long-term programme of conservation of artefacts,
library and archival materials, sites and monuments to secure
their permanent value for Iraq;
(iv)
put in place proper customs and excise
controls in preparation for an Iraqi Customs and Excise department,
and seeking further collaboration with neighbouring countries,
to encourage greater vigilance of borders to stop the flow of
looted cultural property leaving Iraq;
(v)
ensure Iraqi specialists, and any
specialists whom they wish to assist them, have the liberty and
means—supported by coalition military escort where necessary—to
access and assess the extent, scale and impact of looting and
other damage upon museums, archives, libraries, monuments and
sites;
(vi)
establish, in liaison with specialists,
a framework ofpractical security and cultural heritage management,
including the reintroduction of Department ofAntiquities site
guards, to minimise further looting or damage; and
(vii)
ensure that extra resources are made
available to relevant bodies by the Coalition Governments to ensure
that appropriate expertise is available to undertake such work
in a timely and effective manner."
25. We believe that important lessons need
to be learned from the looting of cultural sites, museums, archives
and libraries during and since the conflict in Iraq. The Committee's
inquiry presents an important opportunity to take evidence to
review the UK's policy and practice for military planning as well
as intra- and post-conflict security in relation to the cultural
heritage. We believe that this would helpfully include scrutiny
of current military resourcing, access to and utilisation of heritage
expertise, and training.
26. We would also stress that the need for
the role of cultural heritage in rebuilding Iraq needs to be recognised
across all the key UK government departments and expressly in
funding streams managed by the Department for International Development;
also that the need to ensure that Britain's clear moral obligations
towards re-building Iraq's cultural heritage does not become an
undue burden or drain for DCMS and other organisations, such as
the British Museum or English Heritage, in delivering their duties
and responsibilities towards the UK's cultural heritage.
ORAL EVIDENCE
27. The Standing Conference, having considered
problems of import, export and sale of illicit and other antiquities
for a considerable time, has accumulated much data and expertise
on aspects of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee's inquiry.
It would greatly value the opportunity to enlarge upon its conclusions
in oral evidence to the Committee.
1 The following organisations support this resolution:
All Party Parliamentary Archaeology Group (APPAG); British Academy
Archaeology Section; British Archaeological Association; British
Museum; British School of Archaeology in Iraq; Council for British
Archaeology; English Heritage; Finds Research Group 700-1700;
ICOMOS UK; ICOM UK; Institute of Field Archaeologists; Museums
Association; Oxford Archaeology; Prehistoric Society; Pre-Construct
Archaeology; RESCUE: The British Archaeological Trust; Resource;
Society of Antiquaries of London; Royal Archaeological Institute;
Society of Antiquaries of Scotland; Society for Medieval Archaeology;
Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology; Society for the Protection
of Ancient Buildings Trust for Wessex Archaeology; UK Institute
for Conservation; York Archaeological Trust.
5. Memorandum submitted by the Group
Caring for the Ancestors of Hawaii Back
| 
