|
|
No.49 - October 2001 | Contex HOME FROM THE CHAIR THE VALLETTA CONVENTION ROSE BAILLIE Those who read the British archaeological press will have been aware of much sound and fury in recent months over something called the Valletta Convention. Now that the dust is beginning to settle, what does it all mean? The Valletta Convention is the shorthand title of the ‘European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Revised)’, which is a treaty of the Council of Europe (not the EC) which was ratified by the UK Government and came into effect in March 2001. By ratifying it the UK Government agrees to maintain a legal system to protect the archaeological heritage, promote policies for its conservation, support research, facilitate the pooling of information and promote public awareness and international co-operation. So far so good. The recent controversy largely centres on a clause in Article 3 requiring that "excavations and other potentially destructive techniques are carried out only by qualified, specially authorised persons". Some have interpreted this to mean that no-one without a professional archaeological qualification would be permitted to direct an excavation, with a consequent end to Britain’s long and honourable tradition of amateur excavations. Others take the view that our archaeological heritage is precious and modern techniques are so exacting that only trained persons should touch them. The truth seems to be subtly different. One point to remember is that conventions of the European Council are mediated through each country’s own administrative and legal system. This would be the responsibility of English Heritage, who currently takes the view that no new legislation to introduce an ‘Excavation Licensing’ system is required. At the present time no one can excavate a Scheduled Ancient Monument without a very good reason and specific approval, which would not be given inappropriately. Many other sensitive sites are covered by the provisions of PPG16, which generally require developers to consult archaeological consultants, who hopefully are competent professionals. Amateur fieldwork today is characteristically small scale, low budget and low tech. It is a fact that not every hole in the ground or recovered artefact deserves the full battery of scientific testing and rigorous analysis that modern archaeology could bring to bear on it, but it is important that the amateur could recognise those that do. Maybe we should stop regarding the Valletta Convention as another unwelcome foreign imposition and start regarding it as a reminder that everyone involved in excavations should endeavour to improve and update their personal competence, whether salaried or not. In archaeology experience is the great teacher, but training excavations are only seasonal. Institutions such as the Museum of London would do archaeology a great service if they made available more opportunities for keen amateurs to work alongside their professional staff. |
