Allocation & preservation of archaeological material: a Scottish perspective

1. Allocation & preservation of archaeological material: a Scottish perspective Stuart Campbell, Treasure Trove Unit, National Museums Scotland

3. March 2006 to April 2010 303 assemblages processed through Treasure Trove system- 41% did not attract bids from museums

4. March 2006 to April 2010 303 assemblages processed through Treasure Trove system- 41% did not attract bids from museums March 2006 to April 2010 240 chance/metal-detected finds 1 case disclaimed for lack of museum interest

6. Insufficient storage space in museums “most museums are struggling to accommodate material from their own areas” “we have very limited storage space for material and therefore are having to be selective with regards to bidding for assemblages” “To date our criteria has been to accept any material from within our collecting areas, but we now have virtually no space left for new acquisitions, so we could not automatically store a large new assemblage.”

7. “How are these excavations coming about? This should be looked at again and debated widely as it is creating a burden of obligation for local museums”

8. “[the lack of] policies for dealing with the huge amounts of developer funded excavation archives which will come through the system in the near future”

9. “We rarely know what is coming – and in what quantity “ “generally museums do not know what is impending until the point of allocations “

10. “we do not have the space to store mounds of soil samples”

11. “Storage and care of the material incurs costs .................and in the case of some assemblage material these costs are not justified by the quality of the material or its research potential”

12. “Why [are you] claiming 18th to 20th century material?” “The problem of poor selection procedures by excavating units” “Can we prevail upon excavators to be more rigorous and selective when deciding upon the significance of material and its long term research potential?”

13. “process itself also acts against museum involvement in excavations at an early stage ...... it is too late to have any influence on what should or should not be kept”

14. The decision whether to keep or discard an object is made every day by archaeologists who deal with metal detector finds; can this be applied to excavated material and archives?

15. “Given the contents of some assemblages, especially modern ones, the report is probably of more value than the actual assemblage”

16. “It seems that we end up with boxes and boxes of material which is not ever going to be looked at and definitely will not be displayed”

17. Should all this material have been collected? • Should all of it have been retained after final report production was completed? • Should all of it have been proposed for allocation to a museum?

18. culture and priorities in museums have often shifted away from what rest of sector expects • briefs demanding 100% retention do not reflect the reality of what will be recovered • DSR and reports do not give museums a clear idea of the material in the assemblage