UCL INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY
ARCL 3047: ARCHAEOLOGICAL LAW AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT
2009
0.5 unit
nd
rd
2 /3 year Option
Co-ordinator: Dominic Perring & James Doeser
d.perring@ucl.ac.uk / j.doeser@ucl.ac.uk
Room 413: tel 07703 341 312
1
AIMS
This is an advanced course for undergraduates interested in the management of field archaeology and
the legal aspects of public archaeology, offering progression from first and second year courses in field
and public archaeology. The focus of the course is on the current structure of British archaeology, set
within the context of comparative systems and world conventions.
In particular the course aims to introduce students to the range of legal and organisational instruments
that give structure to the conduct of field archaeology in the UK.
OBJECTIVES
On successful completion of this course a student should:
 Have an overview of legal and management frameworks relevant to the practice of field
archaeology in the UK.
 Understand the principles of the key regulatory instruments, including PPG 16 and MAP 2
 Recognise the relationships that exist between organisational structure and research practice within
commercial and public archaeology.
 Understand the processes of planning and managing an archaeological project.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
On successful completion of the course students should be able to think critically and communicate
effectively on all aspects of British archaeological law and project management.
TEACHING METHODS
The course is taught through lectures supplemented by seminar/workshops, including a mock public
inquiry. Discussion sessions have been incorporated into the scheduled sessions for the course.
WORKLOAD
There will be 16 hours of lectures and 4 hours of practical/seminar sessions for this course. Students
will be expected to undertake around 60 hours of reading for the course, plus 70 hours preparing for
and producing the assessed work. This adds up to a total workload of some 150 hours for the course.
METHODS OF ASSESSMENT
This course is examined by one assessed essay (50%) and one piece of project work (50%). The essay
should be about 2500 words long, illustrated with diagrams as appropriate, well presented, with
Harvard-style bibliography. The nature of the assignments and possible approaches will be discussed in
class, in advance of the submission deadlines. The Course Co-ordinator is also willing to discuss an
outline of the student's approach to the assignment, provided this is planned suitably in advance of the
submission date.
If students are unclear about the nature of an assignment, they should discuss this with the Course Coordinator.
TEACHING SCHEDULE
Lectures and discussions will be held in Term 1 from 4:00-6:00pm on Thursdays, in Room 209.
2
COURSE SYLLABUS
1 Oct 8
2 Oct 15
3 Oct 22
4 Oct 29
5 Nov 5
Law & Archaeology in the UK (Doeser & Perring)
International conventions (Cleere)
Law of cultural property (Bland)
UK planning policy guidance in application (Whytehead)
Environmental Impact Assessment & Health and Safety at Work (Perring)
Reading Week – no teaching
6 Nov 19
7 Nov 26
8 Dec 3
9 Dec 10
10 Dec 17
Mock Public Inquiry (Doeser & Perring)
Project Management and archaeology (Perring)
The Management of Archaeological Projects (MAP 2 & MoRPHE) (Rayner)
Managing our past in the future (Doeser)
Class SWOT analysis of PPG16, MAP2 & PAS (Doeser & Perring)
COURSE TUTORS
Dominic Perring, presently the Director of the Centre for Applied Archaeology (incorporating
Archaeology South-East) has worked in commercial and curatorial archaeology in the UK and overseas
– offering planning advice to District and Borough Councils, and providing expert evidence at Public
Inquiry on behalf of commercial clients.
James Doeser works for the Council for British Archaeology and is completing a PhD at the Institute.
His research involves an analysis of the current legal framework for archaeology in England.
Henry Cleere is Visiting Professor in Archaeological Heritage Management at the Institute. From
1992 to 2002 he coordinated the work of the .International Council on Monuments and Sites
(ICOMOS) in Paris as adviser on cultural heritage to the UNESCO World Heritage Committee.
Roger Bland is Head of Portable Antiquities and Treasure at the British Museum and an Honorary
Lecturer at the Institute. Roger was formerly a curator in the Department of Coins and Medals and was
seconded to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport for seven years. He is responsible for the
Portable Antiquities Scheme, a project to record all archaeological objects found by the public in
England and Wales, and for the BM’s operation of the Treasure Act.
Rob Whytehead is head of English Heritage’s Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service (i.e. the
‘County Archaeologist’ for London), and is responsible for the implementation of planning policy with
regard to archaeological matters throughout the London Boroughs.
Louise Rayner, a specialist in late prehistoric and Roman ceramics, is the Assistant Director of
Archaeology South-East (the Institute’s Field Unit) where she has particular responsibility for
managing post-excavation projects.
3
LECTURE SUMMARIES
The following is an outline for the course as a whole, and identifies essential and supplementary
readings relevant to each session.
Information is provided as to where in the UCL library system individual readings are available; their
location and Teaching Collection (TC) number, and status (whether out on loan) can also be accessed
on the eUCLid computer catalogue system. Readings marked with an ** in the Course reading list,
are those required to keep up with the topics covered in the course, and students are expected to have
read these prior to the session under which they are listed. Other recommended readings, marked *,
are intended to provide a starting point for students to follow up particular issues in which they are
interested or which are likely to be relevant for the preparation of written work and class presentations.
Copies of individual articles and chapters identified as essential reading are in the Teaching Collection
in the Institute Library (where permitted by copyright). As a last resort the Course Co-ordinator (D.
Perring) may also be consulted if particular texts are in short supply.
Week 1: Law and archaeology in the UK - the present situation and future directions
Thursday October 8th: James Doeser & Dominic Perring.
Unlike many countries Britain does not have a single State Antiquity Service, but a variety of
organizations operating at national, county and local levels. Some have statutory functions, while
others do not. The protection of archaeological sites, and the regulation of archaeological practice, is
therefore subject to a complex range of forces, involving legislation, guidance, codes of practice,
contractual obligations, and funding constraints. This introductory session offers an historical review
of how and why the ‘system’ that now applies came into being. It will, in particular, explore the
genesis of two of the most important instruments deployed in regulating archaeological work: PPG16
and MAP2, and look to future developments as these instruments come to be replaced.
This session will involve an overview of the main legal mechanisms which affect archaeological
practice and protection in the UK. By placing each law in its historical and social context it is possible
to see an evolution of legal treatment of archaeological remains. This evolution is profoundly affected
by contemporary governmental concerns. This session hopes to ask (and hopefully answer!) some
fundamental questions about the legal framework as it exists in the UK. These include: What material
is protected under law and why? How are competing "rights" dealt with in legislation? How and why
does archaeological legislation come into being? Who is responsible for archaeological legislation? To
what extent are "archaeological concerns" paramount in archaeological legislation?
Reading
Breeze, D, J. 2006 ‘Ancient Monuments Legislation’ in J. Hunter. & I. Ralston (eds.) Archaeological
Resource Management in the UK. An Introduction (2nd edition). Stroud, Glos: Sutton. (ARCH
AG HUN)
Champion, T. 1996. Protecting the monuments: archaeological legislation from the 1882 Act to PPG16.
In M. Hunter (ed.) Preserving the Past. Stroud, Glos: Alan Sutton. 38-56. (ARCH AG HUN)
Handley, F & Schadla-Hall, T. 2004. ‘Identifying and Defining Agency in a Political Context’ in A.
Gardner (ed.) Agency Uncovered: Archaeological perspectives on social agency, power and
being human. London: UCL Press. 135-150 (ARCH AH GAR)
Week 2: Comparative legal systems & international conventions
Thursday October 15th: Henry Cleere
No two countries protect their archaeology in quite the same way. What are the factors that have led
different countries to develop different legal frameworks? What can we learn from alternative
approaches? Case studies from different countries will be reviewed. This session will also look at the
role of international conventions, including the UNESCO 1972 World Heritage Convention, 1954
Hague Convention, 2001 Underwater Cultural Heritage Convention,and 1970 Convention on Illicit
Trade in Cultural Property, the 1992 Council of Europe Malta (Valletta) Convention on the Protection
of the Archaeological Heritage, and a range of ICOMOS charters.
4
Reading
Cleere, H., 1989 ‘World Cultural Resource Management: Problems and Perspectives’ in Cleere, H.,
(ed.), Archaeological Heritage Management in the Modern World, London: Unwin Hyman,
121-135.
Cleere, H., 2006 ‘British archaeology in a wider context’ in J. Hunter. & I. Ralston (eds.)
Archaeological Resource Management in the UK. An Introduction (2nd edition). Stroud, Glos:
Sutton. (ARCH AG HUN).
ICOMOS: International Charters for Conservation and Restoration (Monuments and Sites 1, 2001)
Week 3 Law of Cultural Property
Thursday October 22nd: Roger Bland
This session will look at the different regimes in place in the UK governing the discovery and sale of
portable antiquities. The Treasure Act 1997, which itself is about to be amended for the first time in the
Coroners and Justice Bill, has effect in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, while the Portable
Antiquities Scheme which was established to complement the Act covers England and Wales. Scotland
has a different system, based on common law and the session will try to look at their respective
strengths and weaknesses and will note that ultimately it comes down to a matter of resources. We will
also look at the issues, both legal and ethical, concerning the sale of archaeological objects and recent
measures that have been introduced in that area, specifically ratification of the 1970 UNESCO
Convention and the 2003 Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act.
Reading
Bland, R, 2005 `Rescuing our neglected heritage: the evolution of the Government’s policy on portable
antiquities in England and Wales’, Cultural Trends 14 (4), No. 56, December 2005, pp. 25796. (available online at:
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/(a4nxe355smfdq0453b5qs3ex)/app/home/contribution.a
sp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,2,5;journal,4,11;linkingpublicationresults,1:110868,1
Gaimster, D. 2004. Measures against the illicit trade in cultural objects: the emerging strategy in
Britain. Antiquity 78 (301). 699-707. (ARCH PERS)
Week 4: Planning policy guidance in application
Thursday October29th: Rob Whytehead
The publication of PPG 16 transformed archaeology, and it is the most widely deployed regulatory
instrument used by planners and archaeologists to protect and investigate archaeological sites
potentially threatened by development. The PPG is, however, no more than a guidance note – and
much of its importance depends on its position within the range of planning constraints established
within Regional Planning Guidance (including Local and Unitary Development Plans) and the newly
emerging structures of Regional Spatial Strategies. This class will explore the relationship of the PPG
to both national legislation and regional planning strategies, within the context of the work of the
busiest ‘County Archaeologist’ office in the UK: the Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service.
It will also discuss the possible changes to the current system that might stem from the adoption of the
recently published consultation paper on the new Planning Policy Statement which will shortly replace
PPG16.
This session will conclude with a briefing for the Mock Public Inquiry to be held in week 6. Students
unable to attend in week 5 must arrange an alternative briefing session with the Course Organiser.
Reading
PPG16 at http://www.planning.detr.gov.uk/ppg/index.htm
Lincolnshire Archaeological Handbook, http://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/section.asp?catId=3155
CBA Planning Factsheet 4, Regional Planning Guidance and the Historic Environment
5
Department for Communities and Environment 2009, Consultation paper on a new Planning Policy
Statement 15: Planning for the Historic Environment
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/consultationhistoricpps
Week 5. Environmental Impact Assessment & Health and Safety at Work
Thursday November 5th: Dominic Perring
This session will be arranged in two parts, each followed by discussion. The first part will focus on
the role of the Environmental Impact Assessments. The E.C. Directive 85/337 on the Assessment of the
effects of certain Private and Public projects on the Environment led to the Town and Country
Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988. The Cultural Heritage is
considered part of the environment so is a required part of an Environmental assessment and the
production of an Environmental statement. This session will look at both the legal and practical
aspects of Environmental assessment.
The second part of this session will consider the impact of Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and
subsequent regulations implemented as a result of EU directives on the conduct of archaeological
fieldwork.
Reading
Friends of the Earth 2005, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) a campaigners guide
www.foe.co.uk/resource/guides/environmental_impact_asses1.pdf
Jones, C and Slinn, P, 2006, Cultural heritage and environmental impact assessment in the Planarch
Area of North West Europe
www.planarch.org/downloads/library/action_3a_final_report_english.pdf
Andrews et al 1991 & 1997, Health and safety in field archaeology manual.
IFA, Risk Assessment Template http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icontent/index
Reading week
Week 6: Mock Public Inquiry.
Thursday November 19th: James Doeser and Dominic Perring
This class will be structured as a mock public inquiry, in which students will prepare and submit
‘proofs of evidence’ as expert witnesses in a re-enactment of the planning appeal concerning the
Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Park Lane, Croydon. Although an unusual case it raised some important
questions about the workings of both PPG16 and local plan policies, in the context of an archaeological
debate about the viability of conservation in situ. Witnesses to the Inquiry included a range of eminent
archaeologists, from both the academic and commercial sphere and students.
Reading
Welch 2000, The rediscovery of the Early Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Croydon ....
LB Croydon Unitary Development Plan http://www.croydon.gov.uk/environment/dcande/UDP
Supplementary papers will be circulated in Week 4.
Week 7: Project Management and archaeology
Thursday November 26th: Dominic Perring
The development of the archaeological profession has been accompanied by a growing awareness of
the importance of management skills, and all commercial archaeological organisations now employ
Project Managers at senior levels. It is no longer possible to chart a successful career in field
archaeology without some experience of project management. This session offers an introduction to
6
management philosophy and management technique, looking first at organisational needs and character
and then at the specific requirements of project management. Various standard techniques and
methods will be reviewed – including SWOT analysis, Gantt charts, project management software (MS
Project) and PRINCE2.
Reading
Papers by Cooper and by Brooke in Cooper 1995. Managing Archaeology
Week 8: The Management of Archaeological Projects
Thursday December 3: Louise Rayner
The introduction, in 1991, of English Heritage’s Management of Archaeological Projects, known as
MAP2, was largely responsible for introducing project-management discipline to the archaeological
process. The systems in MAP2 were predicated on approaches to the problems of backlog analysis
and publication projects, and were introduced by English Heritage to help in their management of postexcavation work. This session will look at the management cycles illustrated in MAP2 and use recent
case-work to show how these influence both the conduct of archaeological research and the
management process. This will also be a briefing session for the Week 9 practical session.
Reading
MAP2
MoRPHE
Andrews & Thomas in Cooper 1995
Week 9: Managing our past in the future
Thursday December 10th: James Doeser
This session will give an overview of proposed changes to the management and protection of the
historic environment in the UK. This is a time of significant change: devolution, Heritage Protection
Reform and wide-scale changes to the planning system are transforming the way archaeologists work.
The seminar will bring together many of the themes covered elsewhere in the course while discussing
the ways in which recent changes in archaeological theory and practice are filtering into the realm of
public policy.
Reading
CBA briefings and interpretation of current proposed changes to PPG16 and heritage protection
legislation:
http://www.britarch.ac.uk/conservation/heritagereform
DCLG PPS15: Planning for the Historic Environment consultation document
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/consultationhistoricpps
English Heritage website dedicated to Heritage Protection Reform:
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.8380
Week 10 Class SWOT analysis of PPG16, MAP2 & PAS
Thursday December 17th: James Doeser & Dominic Perring
The final session will be designed to get the class to think critically about the way in which power is
structured within the archaeological profession, and about where the legislative and regulatory
frameworks are taking us. The initial focus of attention will be on the strengths and weaknesses of
PPG16 and MAP2, which will be approached by means of a SWOT analysis.
Reading:
Chadwick 2001 in Assemblage 5 – http://www.shef.ac.uk/~assem/5/chad.html
7
ASSESSMENTS
Assessment 1. Deadline 5pm on Friday December 4th
Proof of evidence, prepared in respect of a Public Inquiry relating to a Planning Application
for 82-90 Park Lane, Croydon (2500 words).
(This will be an edited and revised version of the document presented as part of the
Week 6 Mock Public Inquiry).
Assessment 2. Deadline 5pm on Friday January 15th
Essay (2500 words).
Review the strengths and weaknesses of one of the following.

Consultation paper on a new Planning Policy Statement 15: Planning for the Historic
Environment

Planning Policy Guidance note 16 (PPG16)

The Valletta Convention

The Portable Antiquities Scheme

English Heritage’s the Management of Archaeological Projects (MAP2)
How might it be improved?
COURSE READING LIST
The IoA library has a classification dedicated to heritage and archaeology legislation:
AG20. Please browse the shelves for books relating to the course that may not be
included here but which may provide alternative readings you can use.
UK Laws and non-statutory policy
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 H.M.S.O., London (re-published in PughSmith and Samuels 1996)
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/cukpga_19790046_en_1
Ancient Monuments Protection Act 1882
Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act 2003
National Heritage Act 1983 and 2002 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2002/20020014.htm
Treasure Act 1996 http://www.culture.gov.uk/global/publications/archive_2002/treasure_code.htm
Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment) Act 1981 http://satututelaw.gov.uk
DoE. 1994. Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: planning and the historic environment. London:
HMSO.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/planningpolicyguidance/plann
ingpolicystatements/planningpolicyguidance/ppg15
** DoE. 1990. Planning Policy Guidance Note 16: archaeology and planning. London: HMSO.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning/planningpolicyguidance/plann
ingpolicystatements/planningpolicyguidance/ppg16
** Department for Communities and Local Government 2009, Consultation paper on a new Planning
Policy Statement 15: Planning for the Historic Environment
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/consultationhistoricpps
Department for Communities and Local Government 2009, Circular 07/09: Protection of World
Heritage Sites
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/circularworldheritage
8
Principal International Conventions to which the UK has acceded
CoE Granada Convention (The Convention on the Protection of the Architectural Heritage in Europe
1985) - http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Word/121.doc
** CoE Valletta Convention (The European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological
Heritage (Revised)) – http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/143.htm
* UNESCO Convention on the means of prohibiting and preventing the illicit import, export and
transfer of ownership of cultural property – http://portal unesco.org/en/ev.php@URL
ID=13039&URL DO=DO TOPIC&URL SECTION=201.html
** UNESCO World Heritage Convention (Convention Concerning the Protection of the World
Cultural and Natural Heritage) - http://whc.unesco.org/world_he.htm
* UNESCO Convention on the protection of the underwater cultural heritage
http://www.unesco.org/culture/laws/underwater/html_eng/convention.shtml
UNECE Aarhus Convention (Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decisionmaking and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters 1998) - http://www.unece.org/env/pp/
Other conventions and charters
Athens Charter. http://www.icomos.org/docs/athens.htm.
Burra Charter. http://www.icomos.org/docs/burrac.htm.
Venice Charter. http://www.icomos.org/docs/e_vencha.htm.
E.C.C.O. Professional Guidelines: The Profession and the Code of Ethics.
http://palompset.stanford.edu/byorg/ecco/library/ethics.html.
VeRes Code of Ethics. http://www.icomos.org/docs/burrac.htm.
UNIDROIT convention on stolen or illegally exported cultural objects (Rome 1995)
http://unidroit.org/english/conventions/c-cult.htm
ICOMOS Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage (Lausanne 1990)
http://www.international.icomos.org/e_archae.htm
European Landscape Convention (Florence)
Jurisprudence and legal theory in general:
Harris, J. W. 1997. Legal philosophies. 2nd ed. London : Butterworths (Law B5 HAR)
Simmonds, N. E. 2002. Central issues in jurisprudence: justice, law and rights. 2nd ed. London :
Sweet & Maxwell. (Law B5 SIM)
Tebbit, Mark. 2005. Philosophy of law: an introduction (2nd ed.). Milton Park, Abingdon : Routledge.
(Law B5 TEB)
Archaeology Law (dense compendia)
Cookson, N. 2000. Archaeological Heritage Law. Chichester: Barry Rose Law. (ARCH AG20 COO)
Pugh-Smith, J. & Samuels, J. 1996. Archaeology in Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell. (ARCH AG20
PUG)
Spoerry, P., 1993, Archaeology and legislation in Britain. Hertford : RESCUE, The British
Archaeological Trust (ARCH AG20 SPO)
O'Keefe P and Prott L 1984 Law and the Cultural Heritage. (Vol 1: Discovery and Excavation; Vol 2:
Creation and Preservation; Vol 3: Movement; Vol 4: Monuments and Sites) Abingdon :
Professional. (ARCH AG20 PRO) – see foreword by Henry Cleere.
9
Heap, D. 1991. An Outline of Planning Law. London: Sweet and Maxwell.
Archaeology Law (general overview - not dense)
** Breeze, D, J. 2006 ‘Ancient Monuments Legislation’ in J. Hunter. & I. Ralston (eds.)
Archaeological Resource Management in the UK. An Introduction (2nd edition). Stroud, Glos:
Sutton. (ARCH AG HUN)
Carman, J. 1995. ‘The Importance of Things. archaeology and the law’ in M.A. Cooper, A. Firth, J.
Carman & D. Wheatley (eds.) Managing Archaeology. London & New York: Routledge. 1932. (ARCH AG COO)
* Carman, J. 1996. Valuing Ancient Things. Archaeology and Law. London & New York: Leicester
University Press. (ARCH AG20 CAR)
** Champion, T. 1996. Protecting the monuments: archaeological legislation from the 1882 Act to
PPG16. In M. Hunter (ed.) Preserving the Past. Stroud, Glos: Alan Sutton. 38-56. (ARCH AG
HUN)
Chippendale C (1983) "The making of the first Ancient Monuments Act, 1883, and its administration
under General Pitt-Rivers" J. British Archaeol. Assoc. 136, 1-55
King, T.F., 2004, Cultural Resource Laws and Practice: An Introductory Guide (2nd edn), Altamira
Press. (ARCH AG KIN) – (the situation in the USA)
* Saunders, A, D. 1983. A Century of Ancient Monuments Legislation 1882-1982. The Antiquaries
Journal 63: 11-33. (ARCH PERS)
Recent publications offering a “government perspective” on the historic environment
EH, 2000. Power of Place. The future of the historic environment:
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1447
DCMS, 2001 The Historic Environment: A force for Our Future:
http://www.culture.gov.uk/reference_library/publications/4667.aspx
Jowell, T. / DCMS, 2005. Better Places to Live. Government, identity and the value of the historic and
built environment:
http://www.culture.gov.uk/reference_library/publications/3695.aspx
Ancient Monuments legislation
Brand, C, M. 1980. Modern Legislation for the Protection of History: the Ancient Monuments and
Archaeological Areas Act 1979. Glasgow: Scottish Planning Law and Practice. Occasional
Paper: 2. (ARCH AG 20 Qto BRA)
* Murray, T. 1989. The history, philosophy and sociology of archaeology: the case of the Ancient
Monuments Protection Act (1882). In V. Pinsky & A. Wylie (eds.) Critical Traditions in
Contemporary Archaeology: essays in the philosophy, history and socio-politics of
archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 55-67 (ARCH AH PIN)
Treasure, The Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme
Thomas, S and Stone, P (eds.), Metal Detecting and Archaeology, The Boydell Press, 2009: a useful
collection of papers on this issue
Bland, R. 2004. The Treasure Act and the Portable Antiquities Scheme: A case study in developing
public archaeology. In N. Merriman (ed.) Public Archaeology. London and New York:
Routledge. 272-291. (ARCH AG MER)
Dobinson, C. & Denison, S. 1995. Metal Detecting and Archaeology in England. London: English
Heritage/Council for British Archaeology. (available through CBA metal detecting portal
10
which contains other relevant research:
http://www.britarch.ac.uk/conservation/portant/research)
Hobbs, Richard, 2003. Treasure : finding our past. London : British Museum. (AG20 HOB)
Stead, I. M: 1998 The Salisbury hoard [foreword by Colin Renfrew]. Stroud, England : Tempus. (AG
20 STE)
History of reform of law of Treasure
Bland, R, `Rescuing our neglected heritage: the evolution of the Government’s policy on
portable antiquities in England and Wales’, Cultural Trends 14 (4), No. 56,
December 2005, pp. 257-96. (available online at:
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/(a4nxe355smfdq0453b5qs3ex)/app/home/contr
ibution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,2,5;journal,4,11;linkingpublicationresults,
1:110868,1
Bland, R, ‘Treasure trove and the case for reform’, Art, Antiquity and Law I 1 (February
1996), 11-26.
Hill, G F, Treasure Trove in Law and Practice. Oxford, 1935
Palmer, N. 1993. Treasure Trove and Title to Discovered Antiquities. International Journal of
Cultural Property 2(2): 275-318. (LAW PERS)
Saville, A, `Portable Antiquities’ in J Hunter and I Ralston (eds.), Archaeological Resource
Management in the UK, 2nd edition, Sutton, 2006, pp. 69-84 (with extensive
bibliography)
Current situation
Portable Antiquities Scheme. Advice for Finders of Archaeological Objects, including
Treasure, British Museum, 2006 (available online at:
http://www.finds.org.uk/documents/advice_for_finders06.pdf
DCMS, The Treasure Act 1996. Code of Practice (Revised) England and Wales. London,
2002. (Available online at: http://www.finds.org.uk/documents/treasure_act.pdf
DCMS, Report on the Operation of the Treasure Act 1 January - 31 December 2004. London,
2007 (available online at:
http://www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_library/Publications/archive_2007/tar_04.htm
where previous annual reports will also be found.
British Museum, Portable Antiquities Scheme. Annual Report 2006. London, 2007. (available
online at: http://www.finds.org.uk/documents/report06.pdf where previous annual
reports will also be found.
Illicit trade
Renfrew, C. 2000 Loot, legitimacy and ownership: the ethical crisis in archaeology. London :
Duckworth. (ARCH AG20 REN)
Gaimster, D. 2004. Measures against the illicit trade in cultural objects: the emerging strategy
in Britain. Antiquity 78 (301). 699-707. (ARCH PERS)
Ministerial Advisory Panel on Illicit Trade. Report, DCMS 2000. (available online at:
http://www.culture.gov.uk/PDF/Report%20of%20Advisory%20Panel%20on%20Illic
it%20Trade.pdf
Brodie, N, J Doole and P Watson, Stealing History. The illicit trade in cultural material.
McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, ICOM UK and Museums
Association, Cambridge, 2000. (available online at:
http://www.museumsassociation.org/asset_arena/text/de/illicit_trade.pdf)
11
DCMS, Dealing in Tainted Cultural Objects - Guidance on the Dealing in Cultural Objects
(Offences) Act 2003. London, 2004. (Available online at:
http://www.culture.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F89F9981-05FD-4A9A-B9DF0C82F3B3C50E/0/Dealincultural.pdf
DCMS, Combating illicit trade. Due diligence guidelines for museums, libraries and archives
on collecting and borrowing cultural material, London, October 2005 (available
online at:
http://www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_library/Publications/archive_2005/illicit_trade.
htm
Underwater and Maritime archaeology
Firth, A. 2002. Managing Archaeology Underwater. A theoretical, historical, and comparative
perspective on society and its submerged past. Oxford: Archaeopress. BAR S1055. (ARCH
AN Qto FIR)
Dromgoole, Sarah. 1999. Legal protection of the underwater cultural heritage : national and
international perspectives. The Hague ; London : Kluwer Law International (ARCH AG 20
DRO)
Burial archaeology
* English Heritage & The Church of England 2005, Guidance for best practice for treatment of human
remains excavated from Christian burial grounds in England, (esp. Annex L1: exhumation of
human remains: a short guide to the law, 17-22). http://www.english-heritage.org.uk
Garratt-Frost, S 1992 The law and burial archaeology IFA Technical Paper No.11 Reading: IFA
Health and Safety in archaeology
** Andrews, W H et al 1991 (revised 1997) Health and safety in field archaeology manual, SCAUM
(earlier edition = Allen, J.L. and Holt, A.S. 1986 - (AG20ALL).
Olivier, A. 1989. Safety in Archaeological Fieldwork, Council for British Archaeology
**Institute for Archaeology, Risk Assessment Template
http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icontent/inPages/docs/codes/risk_assess_temp.doc
Environmental Impact Assessment
**Glasson, J., Therivel, R. and Chadwick, A. 1999 (2nd edn) Introduction to Environmental Impact
Assessment. London: UCL Press.
EU Directive on Strategic Environmental Assessment -http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/eia/sealegalcontext.htm
EU Directive on Environmental Impact Assessment - http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/eia/eialegalcontext.htm
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Environmental Impact Assessment: A Guide to Procedures
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/environmentalimpactassess
ment?view=Standard
English Heritage 1995, A review of archaeological assessment in England 1982-91 Planning for the
past Vol 1 London: English Heritage
Morris, P. and Therivel, R., 2000, Methods of Environmental Impact Assessment, London: UCL Press
(T.Pl A7 MOR)
Friends of the Earth 2005, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) a campaigners guide
12
www.foe.co.uk/resource/guides/environmental_impact_asses1.pdf
Royal Town Planning Institute 2001, Environmental Impact Assessment, Planning Practice Standard.
www.rtpi.org.uk/.../776/PPS-Environmental-Impact-Assessment.pdf
Jones, C and Slinn, P, 2006, Cultural heritage and environmental impact assessment in the Planarch
Area of North West Europe
www.planarch.org/downloads/library/action_3a_final_report_english.pdf
Rescue Archaeology and PPG16
Bradley, J, M. 1995. An evaluation of the impact of PPG16 on archaeology and planning. London:
UCL, Bartlett School of Architecture and Planning. (STORES)
Corporation of London, 2001. The Impact of Archaeology on Property Developments in the City of
London (ISSUE DESK COR 1) www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres
Darvill, T. & Russell, B. 2002. Archaeology after PPG16: archaeology investigations in England
1990-1999. (Bournemouth University School of Conservation Sciences Research Report 10).
Bournemouth and London: Bournemouth University in association with English Heritage.
(ARCH AG 20 Qto DAR)
* Demoule, J-P. ‘Rescue Archaeology. The French Way’ Public Archaeology 2. 170-177 (ARCH
PERS)
* Thomas, R. 2002. Comment (on Rescue Archaeology: The French Way by J-P Demoule). Public
Archaeology 2. 236-238. (ARCH PERS)
The Rose Theatre: case study
Biddle, M. 1989. ‘The Rose reviewed: a comedy (?) of errors’, Antiquity 63. 753-760. (ARCH PERS)
Bowsher, Julian. 1998. The Rose Theatre: an archaeological discovery. foreword by Ian McKellen ;
postscript by C. Walter Hodges. London : Museum of London (ARCH DAA 416 BOW)
* Chippindale, C. 1989. Editorial. Antiquity 63. 409-420 (ARCH PERS)
Eccles, C. 1990. The Rose Theatre. London: Nick Hern Books
Fowler, P. 2001. ‘Time for a last quick one?’ Antiquity 75. 606-608 (ARCH PERS)
* Miles, D, and Brindle, S, 2005 Case Study: The Rose Theatre, Bankside, London. “Display and
conservation”, Urban Pasts and Urban Futures: Bringing Urban Archaeology to Life.
Enhancing Urban Archaeological Remains, International and Interdisciplinary Symposium –
APPEAR, European Union, 41-6. www.in-situ.be/Session2_Miles.pdf
Wainwright, G. 1989. Saving the Rose. Antiquity 63. 430-435.(ARCH PERS)
* Wainwright, G. 2000. Time Please. Antiquity 74. 909-943 (ARCH PERS)
Government, ethics, policy process and archaeological agency.
Atkinson, J. A. Banks, I. and O'Sullivan, J. 1996. Nationalism and archaeology : Scottish
Archaeological Forum. Glasgow : Cruithne Press (Esp Breeze and Dennell articles (pp22-34
and 95-103 respectively) (ARCH AG ATK)
** Handley, F & Schadla-Hall, T. 2004. ‘Identifying and Defining Agency in a Political Context’ in A.
Gardner (ed.) Agency Uncovered: Archaeological perspectives on social agency, power and
being human. London: UCL Press. 135-150 (ARCH AH GAR)
* Hill, M. 1997. The Policy Process in the Modern State. (3rd Ed.) Harlow, Essex: Prentice Hall.
(PUBLIC POLICY H 97 HIL)
Hodder, I., 2000, Towards a Reflexive Method in Archaeology: the example of Catalhayouk
Lipe, W. 1984 'Value and meaning in cultural resources' in Cleere (ed) Approaches to the
Archaeological Heritage, 1-11.
13
Selkirk, A. 1997. Who Owns the Past? London: Adam Smith Institute. (available on CBA website)
Smith, L. 2004. Archaeological Theory and the Politics of Cultural Heritage.London: Routledge. Ch4.
pp58-80
* Thomas, R. 2004. Archaeology and Authority In England. In: Public archaeology. Merriman N, (ed)
London : Routledge (ARCH AG MER)
Local and strategic planning.
Countryside Commission, English Heritage and English Nature 1993, Conservation issues in strategic
plans Northampton: Countryside Commission
English Heritage 1992 Development plan policies for archaeology: advice note for Local Planning
Authorities London: HBMC
English Heritage 1995 Development in the historic environment: An English Heritage guide to policy,
procedure and good practice
The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Park Lane, Croydon: Case Study.
** London Borough of Croydon 1997, Unitary Development Plan
http://www.croydon.gov.uk/environment/dcande/UDP/written?a=5441
Nielsen, R.,1992 “Early Anglo-Saxon Burials in Croydon.” London Archaeologist 7.1, 6-7.
McKinley, J.I., 2003, ‘The Early Saxon cemetery at Park Lane, Croydon’ Surrey Arch. Collections 90,
1-116.
* Pugh-Smith, J. & Samuels, J. 1996. Archaeology in Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell. (ARCH AG20
PUG), pp. 117-8 for the Park Lane case.
**Welch, M.G., 2000, The rediscovery of the Early Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Croydon in 1992 and Its
Partial Excavation in 1999: Trials and Tribulations, Croydon Natural History & Scientific Society.
Archaeological Heritage Management
Alpin, G. 2002. Heritage: Identification, Conservation, and Management. Oxford: Oxford University
Press
Antonellis, A. and Tarler, D (eds) 1999. Heritage Resources Law: Protecting the Archaeological and
Cultural Environment. John Wiley & Sons.
Ashworth, G and Howard P, 1999, European Heritage Planning and Management.
Croft, B and Wills, J., 2002, ‘Archaeology and the Historic Environment in the 21st Century’ Planning
Inspectorate Journal, http://www.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/pins/publications/journals/archive/25_journal/pins25_arch.htm
*Cleere, H., (ed.) 1989, Archaeological Heritage Management in the Modern World, London: Unwin
Hyman.
Glanville, J. 2000. Policy and Law in Heritage Conservation. Spon Press: Conservation of the
European Built Heritage Series.
Hunter, J. and Ralston, I. (eds) 2006 Archaeological resource management in the U.K.: an introduction
(2nd edn) Stroud: IFA and Alan Sutton Publishing
** Lincolnshire Archaeological Handbook (last updated 3 March 2004),
http://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/section.asp?catId=3155 (esp. Ch 3: Archaeology & the Law,
Ch 4: Archaeology & the planning process; Ch 6: Archaeological Project Management).
McManamon, F and Hatton, A (eds) (2000) Cultural Resource Management in Contemporary Society:
perspectives on managing and presenting the past
14
The regulation of contract archaeology
ALGAO 1999. Which Archaeologist? Best Practice for Curatorial or Commissioning Archaeologists:
An ALGAO briefing note.
British Property Federation. 1986. British archaeologists and developers liaison group code of
practice. London: British Property Federation. (ARCH AG20 BRI)
Corporation of London, Planning Advice note 3. Archaeology in the City of London, Archaeology
Guidance, www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/plans
Darvill, T and Atkins, M 1991 Regulating archaeological work by contract IFA Technical Paper No.8
Birmingham: IFA
Institute of Civil Engineers, 2004. ICE Conditions of Contract for Archaeological Investigation
Institute for Archaeologists, Guidance, conduct and regulations homepage.
http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icontent/index.php?page=15
* National Occupational Standards in Archaeological Practice, 2003,
http://www.torc.org.uk/nos/index.asp
Swain, H (ed) 1991. Competitive tendering in archaeology / papers presented at a one day conference
in June 1990. Hertford : RESCUE (ARCH AL SWA)
Project Management
Bradley, K., 1997, Understanding PRINCE2, Butterworth-Heinemann.
*Bruce A and Langdon, K., 2000. Project Management, Dorling Kindersley.
CCTA (eds) 2002, Managing Successful Projects with PRINCE2 (PRINCE Guidance). HMSO.
*English Heritage 2006, The MoRPHE Project Managers’ Guide
http://www.helm.org.uk/upload/pdf/MoRPHE-Project-ManagersGuide.pdf?1254921904
Furnham, A. 1998. The Psychology of Management Incompetence. London: Whurr Publishers.
Nokes, S., 2003, The Definitive Guide to Project Management: The Fast Track to Getting the Job Done
on Time and on Budget, London: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Smith, W. 2003, Project Management and Teamwork, McGraw-Hill Education.
Torrington, D., Weightman, J. and Johns, K. 1989. Effective Management: People and Organization.
London: Prentice Hall.
MAP2 and Project Design.
**Cooper, M.A., et.al. (eds) 1995. Managing Archaeology. Routledge.
Cunliffe, B. 1982. CBA/DOE Working Party on Publication of Archaeological Excavations, Council
for British Archaeology.
** English Heritage 1991. Management of archaeological projects London: HBMC http://www.engh.gov.uk/guidance/map2/index.htm
English Heritage 1991. Exploring Our Past. Strategies for the Archaeology of England. : HBMC
English Heritage 2001, Commissioned Archaeology Programme, Guidance for Applicants.
http://english-heritage.org.uk/archaeology/commissions/guidance
English Heritage, Management
of Research Projects in the Historic Environment: The
MoRPHE Project Managers’ Guide
http://www.helm.org.uk/upload/pdf/MoRPHE-Project-ManagersGuide.pdf?1254921904
Roskams, S. 2001. Excavation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (AL 11 ROS)
15
Thomas, R., 1991. ‘Drowning in data? Publication and rescue archaeology in the 1990s’, Antiquity 52,
147-8.
The ongoing debate
Andrews, G. & Barrett, J. C. 1998 ‘Why cost-effective archaeology needs a new research agenda’.
Institute of Field Archaeologists Yearbook and Directory of Members 1998, 40.
**Chadwick, A., 2001 ‘Taking English archaeology into the next millennium - a personal review of the
state of the art’, Assemblage 5 – http://www.shef.ac.uk/~assem/5/chad.html
Cumberpatch C.G. 2001 ‘Power of Place: Critique and response’, Assemblage 6 http://www.shef.ac.uk/assem/issue6/Cumberpatch_Power_web.html
Hodder, I 2000, Towards a Reflexive Method in Archaeology: the example of Catalhayouk
Thomas, R, 2008 Archaeology and authority in the twenty-first century in The Heritage Reader (eds G
Fairclough, R Harrison, JH Jameson and J Schofield), Routledge, London & New York, 139148
Other useful websites:
www.opsi.gov.uk - legislation
www.culture.gov.uk - DCMS
www.appag.org.uk - archaeology in parliament
www.finds.org.uk - Portable antiquities scheme and Treasure Act
www.algao.org.uk – association of local government officers
ads.ahds.ac.uk/ahds/projects/userinfo/standards.html – standards in archaeology
www.pmi.org/info/default.asp - project management
www.apm.org.uk – association for project management
16
CITING OF SOURCES
Coursework should be expressed in a student’s own words giving the exact source of any ideas,
information, diagrams etc. that are taken from the work of others. Any direct quotations from the work
of others must be indicated as such by being placed between inverted commas. Plagiarism is regarded
as a very serious irregularity which can carry very heavy penalties. It is your responsibility to read
and abide by the requirements for presentation, referencing and avoidance of plagiarism to be found in
the IoA ‘Coursework Guidelines’ at http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/handbook/common/
SUBMISSION OF COURSEWORK
The coursework must be stapled to a completed blue coversheet (available from outside Room 411A or
at Reception) and submitted to the course co-ordinator’s pigeon hole via the Red Essay Box at
Reception by the appropriate deadline. Late submission will be penalized unless permission has been
granted and an Extension Request Form (ERF) completed. Please see the IoA ‘Coursework
Guidelines’ for full details http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/handbook/common/
SUBMISSION OF COURSEWORK TO ‘TURNITIN’
In addition to submitting your coursework as described above, it is now a requirement that you submit
it electronically to the Turnitin system. The necessary code for submitting your work for this course
is:
‘Turnitin’ ID:
Password:
132551
IoA0910
Students who fail to submit their coursework to Turnitin will not receive the mark for the work in
question until they have done so (although they will receive written feedback in the usual way). The
maximum mark for work that has not been submitted to Turnitin prior to the meeting of the Board of
Examiners will be a bare pass.
In advance of submitting your coursework for marking you may, if you wish, run your work through
the system in order to obtain a report on the originality of the wording and then make any necessary
adjustments prior to final submission. Turnitin advisors will be available to help you at specified
times if you need help generating or interpreting the reports.
It is important to recognise that the final decision about whether work contains plagiarism rests with
academic staff. Consequently, the presence or absence of matches in a Turnitin report does not, by
itself, provide a guarantee that the work in question either contains or is free from plagiarism.
Detailed instructions on the use of the system will be supplied separately.
KEEPING COPIES
Please note that it is an Institute requirement that you retain a copy (this can be electronic) of all
coursework submitted. When your marked essay is returned to you, you should return it to the marker
within two weeks.
COMMUNICATION
If any changes need to be made to the course arrangements, these will normally be communicated by
email. It is therefore essential that you consult your UCL e-mail account regularly.
17
DYSLEXIA AND OTHER DISABILITIES
If you have dyslexia or any other disability, please make your lecturers aware of this. Please discuss
with your lecturers whether there is any way in which they can help you. Students with dyslexia are
reminded to indicate this on each piece of coursework.
FEEDBACK
In trying to make this course as effective as possible, we welcome feedback from students during the course of the
year. All students are asked to give their views on the course in an anonymous questionnaire which will be
circulated at one of the last sessions of the course. These questionnaires are taken seriously and help the Course
Co-ordinator to develop the course. The summarised responses are considered by the Institute's Staff-Student
Consultative Committee, Teaching Committee, and by the Faculty Teaching Committee.
If students are concerned about any aspect of this course we hope they will feel able to talk to
the Course Co-ordinator, but if they feel this is not appropriate, they should consult their Personal Tutor, the
Academic Administrator (Judy Medrington), or the Chair of Teaching Committee (Dr. Sue Hamilton).
18