| ISSN 1357-4442 | Editor: Simon Denison |
|---|
| COMMENT |
Struggling amateurs, in need of support
The future is bleak for amateur archaeology, says Peter Huggins
In Britain the amateur has traditionally played a dominant role in archaeology. In the 19th century, the church and the army officer led the way. But today, despite numerous advantages it has over professional archaeology, amateur archaeology is in a parlous state.
The amateur archaeologist's first great advantage over the professional is time: time to plan, time to work, time to think, time to analyse, time to synthesise - as much time as is needed. His second advantage is that he is always working in a particular locality and so gains a local knowledge of the problems and the soils. The value of continuity of experience obtained by working in a locality over many years cannot be over-stressed. Third, the amateur does not need to fit into any currently fashionable pattern of behaviour. He can watch trends in archaeology ebb and flow, and ignore what seems silly and inappropriate.
But despite all these advantages, there is little worthwhile amateur archaeology actually going on. Whether a local amateur archaeological society is active - that is, whether it undertakes excavations and surveys, rather than just organising lectures - depends on the presence of one or two members with the necessary skills, in particular the ability to produce technical drawings and to write accurately, and the commitment to manage a project to publication. So whether a local society, at a given time, has members able and willing to assume the responsibilities is a matter of chance.
At present, there are only about two dozen local societies conducting excavation and fieldwork in the whole of Britain, and some of them are on their last legs. The Waltham Abbey Historical Society is typical. It is one of the few active local societies in East Anglia; but we are getting few new members under the age of forty, and the society will have no one to conduct excavations after I die (and I am now past retirement age).
Sadly, I see little prospect of local societies being reinvigorated with large numbers of new young members. In the 1970s, if we advertised for volunteers for our digs, people came from all over the country. Nowadays, if we advertise, we get little serious response - although the experience of other societies may be different. I genuinely believe young people are largely not interested in archaeology any more.
Many local societies are also hopelessly short of money. The Waltham Abbey Historical Society, with about 200 subscribing members, is relatively well off, having had a windfall in the 1970s, which now produces a small but steady income. Many local societies, however, are much worse off than we are, having to resort to jumble sales and the like to raise money for basic equipment. But even at Waltham Abbey we are largely unable to afford to take advantage of modern technological developments. Hiring geophysical survey equipment, for instance, would be way beyond our reach, even though the technology has revolutionised fieldwork elsewhere.
The debilitating effects of poverty amongst local societies can only be relieved if the national institutions step in. To start with, there ought to be a system of small grants from English Heritage to encourage local societies to undertake research of local, regional or national importance. Secondly, universities and other professional bodies ought to be more willing to lend their expensive equipment to competent local societies. Alternatively, bodies such as the CBA or English Heritage could purchase equipment to hire out to local societies at subsidised rates.
Whatever happens, a few dedicated amateurs will soldier on however hostile the environment. But given the state of amateur archaeology, they are unlikely to make much of a contribution to new archaeological knowledge.
Peter Huggins directs excavations for the Waltham Abbey Historical Society
Editorial note: Is the state of amateur archaeology as worrying as Peter Huggins suggests? British Archaeology would welcome letters on the subject.
Return to the British Archaeology homepage
© Council for British Archaeology, 1995