Tablet

Archaeology and Contemporary Society

January 2002




Exam Questions and Concise Model Answers

Candidates should answer two questions, one from each section

Section A

  1. How are archaeological sites (that are not scheduled) protected in England? What role do County Archaeologists, Site and Monuments Records Officers and Local Planning Officers have in this process? answer
  2. How might the Institute of Field Archaeologists influence the practice of archaeology and the development of archaeological training in the UK? What other factors might play a part (greater or less) in this process? answer
  3. How can English heritage ensure the research and protection of a viable sample of archaeological remains in England for future archaeological work? answer

Section B

  1. King Priam's Treasure - a large and important collection of gold and bronze artefacts excavated by Heinrich Schlieman at Troy (now in Turkey but then within the Ottoman empire) in 1873, and then exported (possibly illegally) to Berlin. Apparently lost after World War II, it was recently discovered in the stores of the Pushkin Museum in St Petersburg, Russia, having been captured from Berlin Museum there by the Soviet Army following the conquest of Berlin in 1945. Both Germany and Turkey have requested the return of the Treasure, whilst Russia has argued that it has a right to keep it, as due reparation for the cultural property it lost to German forces earlier in WWII. In the context of the UNESCO conventions of 1954, 1970 and 1995, who has the strongest case for acquiring/keeping this Treasure? answer
  2. How have the aims and work of the National Trust changed in the last 100 years? What are the major problems that you think it faces in the next 100 years? answer
  3. The 1991 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) has resulted in the return of many thousands of skeletal remains and sacred objects to Native American Nations. How does the repatriation process work, and does it offer a viable model for return of non-skeletal cultural property to countries from which they have been removed? answer






Question 1
How are archaeological sites (that are not scheduled) protected in England? What role do County Archaeologists, Site and Monuments Records Officers and Local Planning Officers have in this process?

Protection primarily occurs through the planning process. Planning proposals are now scrutinised with a view to the effect that the development will have upon the archaeology in the area. This was brought about by the introduction of PPG16. As part of this proposal, Curators can request 'desk-top surveys' of the area, or 'field evaluations' (actual archaeological investigations in the field) to determine the exact nature of the damage that may occur, and in response they may require mitigation of the development proposals to protect the archaeology. Where sites are of 'national importance', whether scheduled or not, it is presumed that they will be reserved in situ. Developers may also be aware of any likely damage that may be caused, or likely calls for mitigation, through consultation of the local Sites and Monuments Record, or the Local Development Plan.

County Archaeologists, SMR Officers and Local Planning Officers act as Curators in this process. They draw up briefs for archaeological work, and ensure the employment of private contractors that will undertake work to the appropriate specifications required through the brief.

Changes in farming land-use, though, do not require planning permission. Therefore change from grass land to arable use, which could cause significant damage, will not be prevented. MARS notes that this is a major cause of piecemeal and, sometimes, total destruction of archaeological sites. Likewise, the excavation activities by the utility companies are also not covered by planning permission, and will not necessitate archaeological conservation.

Question 2
How might the Institute of Field Archaeologists influence the practice of archaeology and the development of archaeological training in the UK? What other factors might play a part (greater or less) in this process?

The IFA was founded in 1982 with a specific remit to influence archaeological practice (to set standards and to encourage training &emdash; both basic and later Continuing Professional Development - CPD). The greatest influence that the IFA currently has on the practice of archaeology in the UK is that developers will usually employ members of the IFA to undertake archaeological work in preparation for planning proposals or during the assessment of planning applications. All members of the IFA (MIFAs, AIFAs and PIFAs) are bound to an IFA Code of Conduct which determines that they must carry out this archaeological work according to technical standards and guidelines set out by the IFA. The Valetta Convention now also requires people undertaking archaeological work to be professionals - usually members of the IFA or professional archaeologists.

The IFA can influence training through CPD courses and negotiation with universities. They have also set out what they believe are the appropriate skills that students should have acquired through the course of an undergraduate degree programme. But, there are other national factors that influence undergraduate training in Universities - Teaching Quality Assessments, Research Assessment Exercise demands 'international recognition' and soon the benchmarking process, and distinctions between specific and generic skills.

Question 3
How can English heritage ensure the research and protection of a viable sample of archaeological remains in England for future archaeological work?

English Heritage (EH) has set out to ensure the protection of a viable sample of the archaeological remains in England through the reform of the scheduling process: the Monuments Protection programme (MPP). EH recognised that the range of scheduled sites was not representative for all periods, areas or types of sites. Therefore, the MPP has set out to amend this bias through clarification of national importance in scheduling and positive discrimination &emdash; scheduling types of sites and periods of archaeology that have been under scheduled in the past.

EH hopes to ensure the research of this viable sample through both their own research monies as allocated according to the research priorities as set out in Exploring Our Past, and the Research Agenda 1997. They are also attempting to determine research through the facilitation and financial support of the regional research frameworks scheme.

Question 4
King Priam's Treasure - a large and important collection of gold and bronze artefacts excavated by Heinrich Schlieman at Troy (now in Turkey but then within the Ottoman empire) in 1873, and then exported (possibly illegally) to Berlin. Apparently lost after World War II, it was recently discovered in the stores of the Pushkin Museum in St Petersburg, Russia, having been captured from Berlin Museum there by the Soviet Army following the conquest of Berlin in 1945. Both Germany and Turkey have requested the return of the Treasure, whilst Russia has argued that it has a right to keep it, as due reparation for the cultural property it lost to German forces earlier in WWII. In the context of the UNESCO conventions of 1954, 1970 and 1995, who has the strongest case for acquiring/keeping this Treasure?

Only Germany and Turkey have valid claims for the repatriation of King Priam's Treasure (KPT). Russia's claim is based on the ideas that KPT is fair reparation for the treasures that they lost to the invading German Army. Whilst their losses are not in doubt, their claim is not supported by any of the UNESCO conventions.

Germany can make a legitimate claim under the 1954 Hague Convention, arguing that the treasures were stolen during wartime and they should be returned. It is clear that they possessed these items before the war, they were taken by the Russian army, and that they are now in Russia. This is a strong claim.

Turkey's claim rests on their belief that KPT was exported illegally. This depends on how the firmin that was given to Schlieman is read. If the Turks are right they have a possible claim according to the 1970 Paris Convention. Otherwise they have no claim.

Therefore, Germany has the strongest claim to have these antiquities returned to them.

Question 5
How have the aims and work of the National Trust changed in the last 100 years? What are the major problems that you think it faces in the next 100 years?

The National Trust was set up in 1895 to preserve sites of historical interest and natural beauty. Their interpretation of this has changed considerably.

Since 1965, the NT has increased its membership considerably and become the largest heritage organisation in the UK.

Major problems faced in the next100 years;


The National Trust needs to keep up its membership since its ability to continue its conservation work depends largely o membership income, develop its farming to cope with sustainable development, and be more socially inclusive and encourage the involvement of its members more. The latter is necessary to ensure continued government grants through such agencies as English Heritage.

Question 6
The 1991 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) has resulted in the return of many thousands of skeletal remains and sacred objects to Native American Nations. How does the repatriation process work, and does it offer a viable model for return of non-skeletal cultural property to countries from which they have been removed?

NAGPRA demanded that by 1995 all institutions receiving Federal monies had to prepare an inventory listing their holdings of Native American skeletal remains and associated grave goods, as well as significant cultural property &emdash; that determined as being of essential importance to the identity of Native Americans and their cultural affiliations. They then to make this information available to the relevant Native American parties who could claim for the return of these items according to;

Competing claims would be settled by a board of experts.

NAGPRA would be a model for the return of grave goods to a country of origin and it would also provide a model for the return of cultural goods of such importance that they define the identity of a nation. This might cover the Parthenon marbles and the Benin Bronzes. It does not provide a direct model for cultural goods in neither of these categories, but might provide an initial assessment for ownership for goods for which there are no direct descendants.