Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction
RESCUE – The British Archaeological Trust is pleased to offer broad support to the
proposal for the development of a UK-wide research strategy for the historic environment. There
are clearly many issues which will benefit from a nationwide approach and it would seem likely that
economies of scale will result from such an approach. Perhaps more importantly there are research
themes which require tackling at this scale rather than at the scale of the devolved polities
constituting the United Kingdom. RESCUE offers the following comments on the outline document
(Fidler 2005) in a positive spirit. The comments made below relate specifically to archaeology but
in some cases may be more widely applicable. The comments arise from the seven bullet points
outlined in section 6 of the outline document and are numbered accordingly.
Response to section 6
Point 1: There is a need to involve the period and subject study groups and special interest groups
in the ‘refreshment’ of the research frameworks. These groups, whose memberships cover a very
wide range of the components of the archaeological sector, are in the unique position of being
engaged on a day-to-day basis with the data which constitute the archaeology of the United
Kingdom. RESCUE would urge that every effort is made to involve these groups at the earliest
stage of the process and to take full account of the views expressed by their members.
Point 3: The concordat agreed between English Heritage and the AHRC is most welcome and there
is no doubt that the theme of ‘Landscape and Environment’ will be of very great interest to many
practitioners within archaeology. RESCUE would suggest that there is a need for further close
liaison between English Heritage and the AHRC on a variety of other topics, specifically those
involving material culture, a core area of archaeological research. British universities have attracted
a considerable measure of criticism within the archaeological community for their acceptance of the
RAE guidelines which grant greater status and prestige to research carried out abroad, in contrast to
research on British material. RESCUE would urge English Heritage to use the contacts with the
AHRC (and similar bodies) to try to reverse this policy. Better liaison between the university
sector, English Heritage and commercial archaeology are essential if the potential offered by
ongoing technical and philosophical developments within archaeology and allied disciplines are to
contribute to the continued improvements to the understanding and interpretation of the data which
constitutes the archaeological record.
Point 5: RESCUE recognises the contribution being made by the UK Historic Environment
Research Group (UKHERG) but notes that there appears to be no mechanism to give a voice to
those within the commercial sector who are carrying out research, whether this is in the form of
developer-funded investigations or privately by individuals working within the commercial sector
who have no access to funding from either the public or private sector.
While the expertise represented by the members of the UKHERG cannot be questioned
(‘non-departmental public bodies, agencies and charities’), it is notable that other major elements of
the archaeological sector are not represented in this list, most notably those involved with research
into material culture in its many and diverse aspects. RESCUE would argue for the rectification of
this apparent omission in order to give a voice to one of the most dynamic and innovative areas of
the archaeological sector.
Point 6: RESCUE welcomes the establishment of the Historic Environment Research Meeting and
the opportunity that this will offer for improved communication between participants. Having said
this, RESCUE notes the narrow membership of the Meeting and the absence of any role for the
many period and regional study groups or the many archaeological practitioners who now work in
the commercial sector (there being no practical alternative to this for most archaeological
practitioners). The impression is of a group that will act (albeit unwittingly) to exacerbate the
current move towards two-tier archaeology with an elite group (English Heritage and the academic
research bodies) and an unrepresented but growing body of professionals within the commercial
field whose work is expected to be devoid of any research element. As we shall outline in greater
detail in our response to the English Heritage Research Strategy (English Heritage 2005), we
believe that research lies at the core of any effective, dynamic archaeological sector and that efforts
should be made to overcome the schisms that have developed in the profession / discipline since the
adoption of a commercial framework for practice in archaeology. We would urge English Heritage
to take a lead in reconnecting the disparate parts of the profession / discipline through a restatement
of the essential place of research within archaeology and archaeological practice. We also look to
English Heritage to take a lead in providing support for those in the commercial sector who are
currently isolated from the resources necessary to undertake effective research.
RESCUE notes that Point 6 appears to break off in mid sentence, raising the question of
where the argument in this section was leading.
Two specific questions were posed on the response form handed out at the launch of the
2005 – 2010 Research Strategy and these will be addressed here, although there may be some
overlap with the points made above:
Archaeologies of inhabitation: An approach to the built environment which moves away from the
self-referential arcana of traditional architectural studies and approaches the built environment as an
arena within which human beings live and interact (thus drawing on themes developed in landscape
archaeology which will, we assume, play a significant part in the EH / AHRC ‘Landscape and
Environment’ research theme). An archaeological approach to the inhabitation of the built
environment should focus on material culture at all scales from the structures of buildings, the
created land- and townscapes within which they exist and as far as the deployment of portable
material culture which plays such a large part in the creation of cultural meaning within constructed
spaces.
We see this as a highly significant theme, given the very evident need to reconnect the
increasingly disparate elements within archaeology and, with specific reference to the unresolved
tensions between the fields of built and buried archaeology.
The archaeology of global transformation: While we would not advocate the unthinking pursuit of
cultural and political fashions, it is clear that there is an increasing interest in (and political concern
with) the process of globalisation and with the social transformations that are entailed in this
process. We would suggest that archaeology has a good deal to offer both in relation to the growth
of the European empires from the 16th century onwards and also with reference to other examples of
human social and economic expansion. There will clearly be a great deal of effort focussed on the
200th anniversary of the abolition of slavery in 2007 and amongst the archaeological responses to
this should be the establishment of the broader context within which the African / New World slave
trade arose, flourished and was ultimately abolished. There is a clear danger that popular initiatives
and educational programmes will offer superficial accounts of the slave trade and associated
activities, largely divorced from the broader global context. Archaeology has the potential to
correct such perspectives by emphasising the transformative nature of the large scale social and
technological changes that characterised the post-medieval and early modern periods. A
considerable amount of effort in post-medieval and historical archaeology is currently focussed on
these subjects and it would be appropriate for the Strategy to assess the range and scope of such
work during 2006 with the object with the intention of contributing to informed debate around these
matters.
Bibliography
English Heritage 2005 Discovering the past, shaping the future: Research Strategy 2005 –
2010. English Heritage.
Fidler, J. 2005 A proposal to develop a UK-wide research strategy for the historic
environment and its sustainable management English Heritage.