Updated: 8 January, 2006
© RESCUE

RESCUE > NEWS > Open Meeting 2002

OPEN MEETING
23rd February 2002
Museum of London, London Wall

RESCUE's annual Open Meeting provided the usual forum for lively debate.

DAVID MILES, Chief Archaeologist, English Heritage, gave a talk entitled:
HANG TOGETHER OR HANG SEPARATELY?

and LORD REDESDALE, Secretary, All Party Parliamentary Archaeology Group, spoke about THE ROLE OF THE A.P.P.A.G

This was followed by a question and answer session led by Harvey Sheldon, Chair of RESCUE.

Hang Together or Hang Separately?

A short résumé of a talk given by David Miles, Chief Archaeologist, English Heritage to the RESCUE Open Meeting in February 2002.

RESCUE was my second employer as a professional archaeologist. In the heroic period in 1971, when it was the loudest voice decrying the destruction of our historic environment, Rescue recruited me to produce an implications study of re-development in Tewkesbury (Gloucestershire). Already a swathe of half-timbered buildings in the northern section of the town had been demolished for the sake of a supermarket, whose most distinguishing feature was its staggering banality and featurelessness.

RESCUE wanted a rapid, targeted, punchy, high profile report; academically authoritative, but also a polemic which would carry political impact. And it worked. At a high profile press conference in the town the local authority moved rapidly to support the report's conclusions, announced its commitment to maintaining the character of Tewkesbury and that it would appoint a town archaeologist.

A heart-warming story and a victory for conservation 30 years ago. But as Sir Neil Cossons, the Chairman of English Heritage, never tires of emphasising, the battles of the past still need to be re-fought in the 21st century. The pressures on our towns and countryside are as great now as in the 1960s, the stakes are higher and the world more complex.

Planning Policy Guidance Note 16: Archaeology and Planning (PPG 16) has placed archaeology firmly at the centre of policy and decision making in the planning process. It has generated tens of millions of pounds of extra revenue for archaeological evaluation and mitigation. There are problems, in particular the need to guarantee standards and to ensure that the widest possible public benefits from archaeological research. There are exemplars: Essex, Cornwall, Lancashire and the North-East all have a strong tradition of community-based, research-orientated archaeology and a holistic approach to the historic environment. Projects such as the A419/A417 Swindon to Gloucester road scheme - professionally planned and executed by an integrated team supported by the Highways Agency, published its results at academic and popular levels within eighteen months.

These are the good-news stories. Elsewhere the issues that exercised RESCUE in the early 70s remain. The pressure for wholesale and insensitive change in urban areas, particularly our great 19th century towns and cities, the casual threats which sweep away the monuments of declining but once pioneering industries in textiles, coal, railways and metalworking. The recent past is the most frequently devalued. What represents 20th century culture more than sports stadia, cinemas, shops, seaside resorts and the remains of the World Wars and the Cold War? These too are under increasing pressure.

In the countryside English Heritage's Monuments at Risk Survey has emphasised what we all know - that arable farming more than any other agency continues to destroy the fragile traces of our prehistoric, Roman and medieval past. RESCUE's early polemic compared this to burning books in a library. More powerful agricultural machinery, economic pressures on farmers, the desiccation of wetlands and the erosion of the coastline combine to increase the erosion of the countryside. So here are major challenges for those who seek to protect and manage the historic environment in the 21st century.

How should we meet these challenges? Most of all those of us who value and love the subtle, varied, beautiful and no-so-beautiful fabric of the past must speak with one voice. We know from personal experience, from television viewing figures, and from the recent MORI poll commissioned for Power of Place, the future of the historic environment, that the general public has enormous interest in and support for the historic environment. They value not just the abbeys, castles, the Stonehenges but their own everyday, richly textured and unique surroundings. People like character and quality.

But those of us who are actively involved, whether professionally or voluntarily, suffer from the curse of fragmentation - industrial archaeologists, Georgians, Victorians, Prehistorians, members of Twentieth Century societies, antiquarian societies, institutes of field archaeologists and historic buildings conservators; anthropologically fascinating but politically inept. We are letting down the people who expect us to argue our case effectively and defend what we value.

Thank God we are now showing signs of growing awareness. The creation of Heritage Link is a promising sign of co-operation. We must learn from the natural environmentalists the lesson that we are more powerful if we stand together, delivering clear messages based on well-structured research. Professional organisations such as the Institute of Field Archaeologists and Institute of Historic Buildings Conservators now appreciate that they represent two sides of the same coin. The recent creation of the All-Party Parliamentary Archaeology Group reflects growing political interest.

The amateur sector, an important and distinctive element, particularly in England, feels sidelined by the growth of professionalism. The Valletta Convention is not a threat to them; on the contrary I hope that it will be a real stimulus to co-operation, improved training opportunities and a regeneration of the voluntary involvement in the historic environment. And this must also apply to maritime archaeology, where the sports diving community can play a major part in the discovery, management and presentation of wreck sites and underwater landscapes.

The Portable Antiquities Scheme, supported by the Heritage Lottery fund, is an opportunity to harness the real energy and enthusiasm of metal detectorists.

The importance of the publication of The Historic Environment: A Force for Our Future (DCMS, 2002) should not be underestimated. For the first time the government, through DCMS and the Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions (a pity that DEFRA was missing from the title page), has made a positive statement of support for the historic environment. English Heritage has been given a clear mandate to provide leadership and advocacy. The Government remains fully committed to the principles set out in PPG 15 and 16 and in the system of statutory protection. However, it has also initiated a review in order to clarify and simplify the procedures, a threat perhaps, an opportunity certainly.

The recent government quinquennial review of English Heritage provided a platform for those who regard the historic environment as an obstacle to modernism, economic prosperity and vibrant change to come out fighting. This they certainly did no holds barred and bare-knuckled. They are wrong, but English Heritage has an obligation to be more positive, less bureaucratic, more enthusiastic, more transparent and more helpful. RESCUE can recharge that energy which it unleashed in the early '70s, if it joins together with all those who share the same values and want to make a difference.