Memorandum submitted by RESCUE—The
British Archaeological Trust
INTRODUCTION
In our submission to the previous inquiry into
the heritage sector (Protecting and preserving our heritage) RESCUE—The
British Archaeological Trust drew attention to the current lamentable
state of facilities for the storage, curation, conservation and
study of archaeological archives in our museums. We are particularly
pleased that the Committee should have chosen this important subject
as the focus of a new inquiry.
The position of RESCUE can be summed up as follows:
— Archaeological archives are
the outcome of archaeological investigations of all types (excavation,
landscape and topographical survey, geophysical survey, standing
building survey, the analysis of artefacts, ecofacts and environmental
data etc). As such they represent the raw material of archaeological
analysis and interpretation;
— Archaeological investigation
begins with excavation and survey but it does not end once the
archive has been deposited in a museum. As an interpretative,
research-led discipline archaeology continually revisits archives
from earlier work, approaching them with new questions and new
techniques, seeking new answers to old questions and answers to
new questions;
— The care and curation of archaeological
archives is central to the role of museums in regard to archaeology
in its broadest sense;
— The conservation of archaeological
archives (as well as other collections) is an ongoing process.
RESCUE is deeply concerned that the last decade has seen a catastrophic
reduction in in-house conservation staff in museums throughout
the country. We share with the Institute of Conservation a profound
concern that this will lead to the progressive deterioration of
unique archaeological and historical assets over time, as well
as a loss of expertise in conservation, a skill in which Britain
has a world wide reputation;
— The volume of archaeological
work currently being undertaken under the PPG 16/PPG 15 regime
means that the volume of archive material being produced is taxing
the ability of the museum sector to deal with it effectively.
It is essential therefore that the resources necessary for archives
to be curated and managed appropriately are maintained and enhanced
or are put in place where they do not exist. It is equally essential
that appropriate facilities are available in order than research
on both existing and new collections can be undertaken with the
objective of refining and enhancing our understanding of the archaeology
and history of communities at the local, regional and national
level;
— RESCUE believes that archaeological
archives are at present underused. There are two principal reasons
for this. The first is that many museums lack adequate suitable
space for the examination of collections and for their further
investigation and analysis. The second is that universities, for
reasons connected with the principles underlying the Research
Assessment Exercise, encourage post-graduate students to work
on foreign material in preference to British material. While we
believe British archaeologists have much to contribute abroad,
there should be an acknowledgement that work on British material
has an equal research value to that from abroad. Both of these
issues need tackling, the first with the investment of more money
in research facilities in local, region and national museums,
the second by adjusting the criteria by which university research
is rated (an adjustment that will have no financial implications
for the Universities concerned); and
— The emphasis on the presentation
of existing museum collections, while welcome in its own right,
has not been matched with investment in the kind of facilities
which will ensure that museums are able to reflect the changing
approaches to and understanding of the past in the future. This
is in spite of the fact that archaeology and history are dynamic,
interpretative disciplines which depend upon continuing research
in order to remain socially relevant and intellectually coherent.
In the call for contributions to the new inquiry,
the committee have highlighted three particular areas of concern.
RESCUE has views on all of these matters.
Funding, with particular reference to the adequacy
of the budget for museums, galleries and archives, and the impact
of the London 2012 Olympics on Lottery funding for the sector
RESCUE believes that current levels of funding
for the archiving and curation of archaeological archives are
entirely inadequate to the task in hand. All the information that
we have gathered from the museum and the commercial archaeology
sectors tells us that storage facilities in local and regional
museums are reaching capacity and that urgent action is required
to avert a situation in which museums will no longer be able to
accept archives from archaeological companies and trusts. RESCUE
does not believe that proposals for the partial or complete destruction
of archaeological archives through reburial, sale or disposal
in landfill sites are acceptable, either pragmatically or ethically.
Archaeological archives represent an essential element of the
principle of "preservation by record" which forms a
central principle in Planning Policy Guidance notes 15 and 16.
As such funding should be in place in order that the archives
resulting from activities under PPG 15 and 16 may be stored in
adequate conditions where they will be accessible to the researchers
who generate the interpretations which underlie the new museum
displays, exhibitions, books, television and other media presentations
which are currently proving enormously popular with a wide variety
of audiences.
As outlined in our submission to the previous
inquiry, we would expect both government and the heritage sector
to look seriously at new methods of storage, including the reuse
of suitable Cold War military facilities as regional storage centres
and liaison with the logistics industry with reference to the
creation of new cost-effective, accessible and efficient storage
facilities. We would expect future applications for Lottery or
similar funding for new and expanded museums and galleries to
include provision for new storage and archiving facilities as
a standard element alongside the more "high-profile"
visitor facilities and presentational innovations.
As outlined in our response to the first inquiry,
we are not opposed to spending on sport in general or the Olympics
in particular but we are strongly opposed to any reduction in
funding in other areas to support the funding of sport. Sport
has demonstrated its ability to raise significant sums of money
through the sale of television and other media rights and through
commercial sponsorship. Archaeology and history do not have such
opportunities and we believe that the allocation of government
funding should reflect this disparity in the possibilities for
the generation of revenue.
Acquisition and disposal policies with particular
reference to due diligence obligations on acquisition and legal
restrictions on disposal of objects
RESCUE does not accept the need to relax existing
rules regarding the disposal or destruction of archaeological
or historical assets currently held in museums and galleries.
Archaeological archives are the product of archaeological investigations,
whether these are in the form of non-invasive survey or excavation
or of post-excavation analysis. As such they are unique cultural
assets which should not be destroyed to satisfy short-term funding
or logistical problems. It is disturbing to hear (as we have)
that curators of local and regional museums are so limited for
storage space that they are considering (albeit reluctantly) the
destruction of parts of selected archives to ease such problems.
We have published examples of such decisions in our newspaper
Rescue News and can supply copies to the Committee should these
be required.
The remit and effectiveness of DCMS, the Museums,
Libraries and Archives Council and other relevant organisations
in representing cultural interests inside and outside Government
RESCUE is deeply concerned at the lack of understanding
of the nature of archaeology and the archaeological process shown
by the DCMS in recent years. We have discussed this lack of understanding
in greater detail in our response to the essay Better places
to live recently published by the DCMS on behalf of the Minister,
Tessa Jowell MP. The Department has archaeological advisors in
the form of English Heritage, CADW and Historic Scotland and the
archaeological profession as a whole has shown itself more than
willing to enter into dialogue and discussion with the Department
through initiatives by individual bodies and by the formation
of Heritage Link and The Archaeological Forum. In spite of this
there seems to exist a degree of resistance on the part of senior
members of the Department (most particularly the Minister herself)
to seek any serious understanding of the nature or scope of archaeology.
We are pleased to say that the situation has improved to some
extent with the appointment of David Lammy as Minister for Heritage,
but there remains a seeming lack of commitment to archaeology
when compared with the commitment to other interests such as sport
and the performing and fine arts. We look to the Committee to
recommend a rectification of this situation and to ensure that
the advice freely available from the archaeological profession
is paid appropriate attention.
We are disappointed in the lack of leadership
shown by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council in respect
of the crisis in resources for archaeological archives, but recognise
that the Council has a wide remit and that this may have led to
a lack of focus on what we regard as a major problem facing the
heritage sector as a whole.
RESCUE would like to see closer co-operation
between government and the archaeological profession (notably
involving the Archaeological Archives Forum) as a way of resolving
the many problems existing in this area before we begin to lose
unique and irreplaceable parts of our common heritage because
of the lack of relatively small sums of money and appropriate
facilities.
RESCUE would be more than happy to contribute
a more detailed body of evidence to the Committee, either in writing
or verbally should this be required. Copies of our earlier submissions
to Government are available on our website www.rescue-archaeology.freeserve.co.uk
and a number of these have been lodged in the House of Commons
Library. We can also provide hard copies or digital copies as
required.
September 2006
|
