| NORTHERN
EUROPE
Maggie
Ronayne, Junior Representative (National
University of Ireland, Republic of Ireland)
maggie_ronayne@hotmail.com
The
first part of this document is a written
version of an oral report which I presented
to the Executive meeting on 8 January 1999
at WAC 4. It takes account, in particular,
of a number of concerns raised with me by
members from the region in the months preceding
WAC 4. The middle section reports on the
outcome of various issues, relevant to the
main concerns expressed by WAC members from
Northern Europe and a couple of other items
which arose at WAC 4. Finally, the last
section details some of the work which has
gone on in the region since WAC 4, outlining
some important ongoing issues for members
to note. As listed in WAB 9, the countries in the Northern Europe region are: Belgium, Denmark,
Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Latvia,
Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, The
Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Republic of
Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom.
Report
to WAC 4
The
main problem in Northern Europe in the last
four years has been the lack of interest
in membership in-between the major congresses
of WAC. From feedback I received, this seems
to be related to a perception among some
that the issues of WAC are not directly
relevant to Northern Europe as such but
are ‘global’ or related to indigenous peoples,
or people living in de-colonised countries.
For others, the relevance was clear but
their reluctance to join was connected with
the controversy that surrounded WAC in the
wake of its third congress in New Delhi,
with a perception among politicised students
and, indeed, professionals that WAC was
failing to deal effectively with realpolitik.
A third perception was that WAC did not
offer a real opportunity for people to get
actively involved at ground level, in terms
of the expense of getting to the congresses,
the flow of information, the lack of translation
facilities and the over-centralisation of
the operation in the UK.
These
issues, rather than the narrower focus on
membership numbers, need to be addressed
urgently, particularly in relation to the
role of junior representatives and the regional
representatives in general.
In
1997, I attempted to do just that by setting
up a network of ‘correspondents’ in the
region who would report to, and work with,
me on issues arising in their areas which
were of concern to WAC. These could then
be dealt with through regional campaigns
or more broadly by means of publicity in
WAC news. The initiative did not work however.
There were three main problems which were,
firstly, that it was extremely difficult
to establish any kind of regular contacts
with WAC members in some countries. Secondly,
the few who initially responded allowed
the contact to lapse. But thirdly, this
falling off of contact and difficulties
of communication are not unresolvable but
were mainly due to problems with the structural
nature of WAC in Northern Europe itself.
Because there is no relationship between
WAC as a ‘global’ entity and different issues
and struggles over the past at ground level,
people are unsure as to where they stand,
as the membership, in organising campaigns
in the name of WAC and so on. There is also
an uncertainty as to what kinds of issues
would constitute WAC issues.
During
the past four years WAC has continued to
display posters and leaflets at conferences
like the Theoretical Archaeology Group Conference
and reports of conferences attended by WAC
members in Northern Europe have been forwarded
to WAC
News for publication at various times.
WAC was also represented at the Archaeologists
Against Development meeting at Newbury in
England which was part of a protest by environmental
groups. A number of cases relating to the
repatriation of indigenous remains from
European museums arose and were dealt with
by indigenous representatives, Officers
of WAC, and members of WAC with expertise
in this area (particular thanks must go
to Dr Cressida Fforde in this regard). The
latest work is on the case of Saartje Baartman,
a Khoisan woman who was taken to Europe
and exhibited both before and after her
death in 1815. Her body was studied, displayed
and stored in Paris. The WAC Executive passed
a resolution demanding the return of her
remains to South Africa, at the inter-congress
in Croatia in 1998.
After
this inter-congress, several members in
the Northern Europe region responded to
another call to discuss or suggest issues
which need to be dealt with in WAC. In the
main, these concerned aspects of the organisation
itself which they were unhappy with or wanted
to see change in. The issue of the public
accountability of the organisation (including
its finances) was raised. There was concern
about the ethics and politics of its publication
policy, e.g. contractual arrangements with
publishers. The need for a greater degree
of openness and bottom-up decision-making
on all issues between the officers, executive
and members was another issue which people
felt strongly about. It was also suggested
that there was a need for more widespread,
and timely circulation of documents before
meetings where decisions are taken. Overall,
several members seemed to think that there
was a need for changes to the statutes to
accommodate such concerns. Executive members
were asked to give four priorities from
each region to be presented for discussion
in the meeting. The four points below were
those I suggested.
WAC
activities need to be integrated more with
issues concerning the past, the various
groups of people who define themselves in
relation to that past and the problems of
the archaeological profession which are
central
to Northern Europe. The links with indigenous
issues, the politics of race, imperialism
and so on can be made across
several areas so that the relevance of WAC,
in all sorts of struggles over the past
around the world, can be seen in relation
to more localised or specific struggles.
In Northern Europe, for instance, there
are problems relating to archaeological
contract labour which could be related to
similar problems in other regions. Or struggles
over race, gender and nationality in the
archaeological, historical or heritage workplace
in Europe could be related to similar activities
in other regions. At the moment, there seems
to be a danger of a ‘west and the rest’
perception of WAC activities and goals.
Such an integration would remove at least
part of the problem - with the focus of
WAC on a world congress - which most students,
and, I would venture to say, most archaeological
fieldworkers on temporary contracts and
most people with an interest in the past,
cannot afford to get to.
WAC
in Northern Europe needs to move towards
a greater localised visibility in terms
of information and support media. This would
help a great deal in generating awareness
about the kinds of issues which can be reported
to the regional representative, with developing
a climate of openness about WAC procedures
and business and the role of the membership
in that business. It could also be linked
to other non-WAC media as a means of drawing
attention to action on those issues which
will arise. Since it is often said that
Northern Europe is one of the advantaged
regions when it comes to IT access, we should
use this historical situation to distribute
information and possibly, to provide information
sites and generate support through various
campaigns for matters arising in other regions.
This visibility could involve the setting
up of a regional web-site with a link to
the main WAC site and to those of other
regions.
With
this move towards localisation of information
and activity the structure of the regional
representative system and local membership
would need to change. A system of reporting
by a series of ‘correspondents’ or by the
membership would work better with some devolution
to the regions of what has previously been
Executive work. Having spent four years
as Junior Representative (but in a region
where the Senior Representative was not
active), it has been my experience that
it takes more than one or two people to
work on and administer the various WAC matters
arising. The details of this are obviously
complex but it would seem that in order
to get people actively involved, some kind
of move towards a more substantive democratic
organisation is necessary.
It
will be necessary to deal with the problem
of the perceived failure of WAC to deal
with controversies it has been involved
in. This will have to be dealt with through
open debates in journals, on mail lists
and so on at all the different levels that
WAC members themselves work at. It must
be a rigorous historicization which results
in concrete action and change at regional
and local levels.
WAC
4
The
issues outlined by members were all raised
in Executive and Council meetings. Since
most of them concern some element of structural
change, I will relate what has happened
first of all to the proposals to change
the statutes. The proposals for substantial
change to the statutes of the organisation
resulted mainly from the debate at the inter-congress
in Croatia. A resolution proposed at the
plenary session of that inter-congress called
for consideration of such changes, and was
noted by the WAC Executive. The Executive
then called for position papers and two
were submitted by September 1998, one by
the Officers and some Executive members,
and one by a WAC member from Northern Europe,
Willy Kitchen. The Officers’ paper was proposed
as a series of amendments to the statutes.
During WAC 4 the Executive noted that both
documents had been submitted and a workshop
for all members was organised by the former
WAC Secretary, Julian Thomas, where the
position papers were discussed. Due to disagreement
on the kind and amount of structural change
required and also because many WAC members,
including members who found themselves elected
to Council, complained that they had not
received copies of proposed changes and
position papers, the whole debate was postponed.
A couple of changes were passed by Council.
One of these created an elected post of
Vice-President and five un-elected vice-presidential
posts. Another resolution passed made changes
to the regional electoral colleges and how
they are constituted. So, WAC members will
get the chance to raise points in the debate
about the statutes which will take place,
presumably through this publication and
in other forums, over the next couple of
years. To begin, I propose that both the
position papers submitted before WAC 4 are
published in WAB
(with amendments if the authors wish) and
written comments and further position papers
are invited from the entire membership.
In
relation to the accountability of the organisation,
I raised both the issue of the finances
of the organisation and the ethics of publication
with the rest of the Executive. There seemed
to be a strong feeling that there ought
to be more regionalization on membership
fees and other issues, in order to suit
different socio-economies and regional priorities.
Others wanted to stick with a universal
model as it exists now. It was explained
that the WAC Charitable Company is a separate
organisation to WAC itself, although the
officers of WAC are members of its Board.
The full Board consists of the members of
the original organising committee of WAC
1, the President, Secretary and Treasurer
of WAC and one other member to be elected
by the Executive. A further three directors
are nominated by the country which hosts
the next WAC Congress. It controls the advances
and royalties from the One World Archaeology
(OWA) series of books. Further, it was suggested
that WAC could not really explore other
publishing or financial options as it relies
on the royalties from this series. It could
however get reductions on these and other
publications. It was agreed that WAC members
will now receive a reduced subscription
to the new journal, Public
Archaeology.
Executive
members from other regions also took the
opportunity to stress that their members,
potential members and indigenous workers
could not afford such books, or indeed read
them because of a lack of attention in WAC
to translation difficulties. I also raised
the matter of restrictive contractual arrangements
involved in dealing with major publishing
companies and gave the example of the recent
dispute about the OWA volume from the Croatian
inter-congress. There was considerable sympathy
in the Executive for Professor Shrimali’s
situation in wanting to publish some of
the papers in a non-profit journal in India
where they would have a useful effect but
being precluded by the prior arrangement
between WAC, the WAC Charitable Company
and Routledge. The Executive suggested that
I propose a resolution to Council that a
standing committee should be set up, drawn
from the membership, to deal with the ethics
and politics of publication in WAC. Due
to time constraints, I was precluded from
putting this as a resolution at Council
but following a brief summary of the situation,
Council agreed that the formation of the
committee should go ahead. The President
of WAC stressed, in noting this agreement,
that it was important that the members of
the committee be drawn from interested parties
in the entire membership of WAC rather than
from the Executive. I will administer the
setting up of this committee (though as
an Executive member I should not sit on
it) through the next WAB.
A
resolution was put to council on the matter
of the plans of English Heritage for Stonehenge
in the UK. Because many Council members
were not aware of the details of this particular
issue, the resolution was not passed by
Council and it was referred to the Executive.
The Executive instructed two WAC members
to compile a report on the matter so that
the Executive and Officers could take any
action necessary. In relation to this matter
and other resolutions on cultural property,
a task force was also set up on the destruction
of cultural property in conflict situations.
It was agreed that areas to be covered may
include tourism as well as war and post-war
situations. Again, I am administering this
for the convenor of the task force, Henry
Mutoro of the University of Zimbabwe, and
I will be reporting on its brief in the
next WAB.
In
relation to communication, it remains difficult
to get the necessity of translation recognised
and most of those not in favour of seriously
pursuing the matter (on Council and in the
Executive) referred to the expense involved.
It does look, however, as if an attempt
will be made at WAC 5 to deal with this
issue. WAC has also received an offer from
an academic internet service provider called
H-Net to set up email discussion lists,
bulletin boards and other services for free.
This has already been accomplished for the
WAC Officers and developments with regard
to the Executive and the membership are
awaited. The possibility of this becoming
a commercial operation, being used to advertise
to WAC members, was raised as well as the
possible exclusion of people who do not
have internet access. The President of WAC
suggested that while it was unfortunately
true that a lot of people still do not have
access to the internet, this situation would
change radically in the future. Meanwhile
every effort would be made to make sure
everyone was still included in the flow
of information in WAC. He suggested that
commercialisation of this service was not
a worry but that WAC would, in any case,
review its relationship with H-net if such
a situation arose.
Two
documents were presented to Council on the
future objectives of WAC which readers will
have noticed were published in WAB
9. As a co-author of the second document,
I should explain that the action of producing
an alternative agenda was taken in order
to make the point that such issues should
not be decided by the Executive, but by
the full membership. These decisions should
happen after a debate either ‘live’ involving
a fully-briefed Council, or through the
pages of WAB and it should involve the full, public presentation of all positions.
The specific suggestions made in both documents
are just that, suggestions. Other suggestions
may be made which, along with the two documents
so far, need to be debated and voted on
by the membership before any point made
may have the status of ‘policy’. The President
of WAC made the point in Council that both
documents, rather than just the ‘majority’
document should be published in WAB
so that wider consultation would take place
and he set this as a precedent for all future
policy documents.
Council
has also agreed that the WAC Executive and
Officers should pursue affiliation with
UNESCO. The WAC 4 Council minutes will be
sent to UNESCO as a part of this bid. In
addition, Council at WAC 4 was given instruction
by the President that when deciding whether
to adopt, note, amend, refer or reject a
resolution, Council should refer to UNESCO
policy on each particular issue, as a guideline.
Post-WAC
4
In
the aftermath of WAC 4, I was contacted
by WAC members on temporary contracts in
field archaeology. On their behalf I wrote
to the organising committee of the Theoretical
Archaeology Group conference held in the
UK every December, outlining WAC’s position
on the historical and social role, and the
political context of archaeological enquiry.
I requested that the dates of the conference
be changed to accommodate those who could
not attend during the week without losing
pay. I suggested that if this could not
be done, that the point be discussed in
the TAG open meeting and the TAG National
Committee meeting, both of which will be
held at the conference. In 1998, the conference
had been organised over a weekend and this
had allowed contracted fieldworkers to attend.
There had also been a session on issues
in fieldwork which had attempted to follow
up on previous theoretical discussion of
the field/academia divide in archaeology.
Cardiff TAG have not been able to change
the dates of their conference but have agreed
to discussion in the meetings mentioned
above. It would be useful if as many WAC
members as possible who are attending TAG
could come along to the open meeting and
add their voices in support. In addition,
I would like any members of the TAG National
Committee who are WAC members to contact
me beforehand.
The
report on the English Heritage Masterplan
for Stonehenge was prepared by June 1999.
It was then suggested that this would be
submitted to English Heritage as WAC policy
and a press release was to be prepared to
that effect. In addition, I was asked by
the CEO of WAC to present it as such to
a public meeting on the Stonehenge Masterplan
organised by RESCUE (The Trust for British
Archaeology). I refused on the basis that
the rest of the Executive and the rest of
the WAC membership had not had sight of
such proposals; this was ‘a report to the
Executive’ by two WAC members, rather than
policy (which may only be decided on by
the Council of WAC). I attended the meeting
in a personal capacity and it is certainly
true that this Masterplan contains several
elements which clash with the WAC position
on cultural property as outlined in the
statutes, codes and various resolutions
of the organisation. The plan is expected
to take nine years to implement, with a
series of consultative and/or review stages,
and as such there would have been ample
time for everyone in WAC to have sight of
the report and proposals through WAB,
before a decision was made. I conveyed to
one of the authors of the report, to the
CEO and to the President of WAC the concerns
of some members who had taken the trouble
to contact me about the compiling of this
report and these proposals. In particular,
it was felt that the consultation, both
during and after the completion of the report,
had not been widespread at all. I received
responses from the CEO and the President
of WAC, taking note of this and other concerns.
As the proposals have already been submitted
to English Heritage and a press release
sent out, these points would not appear
to have been taken on board. In any case,
the full report is 21 pages long and if
any members wish to see it, they can contact
me and I will send on copies.
I
received a request for support from activists
in India who are fighting the forced removal
of indigenous people in the Narmada valley.
A campaign was organised this summer, over
some of the UK email discussion lists, to
write letters of protest to the President
of India concerning the effects of the Narmada
dam. Under the Indian constitution, the
President of India has powers to halt any
project which harms indigenous people. This
was an issue on which WAC has been involved
since WAC 3 in New Delhi. It was thought
that a stay had been granted by the courts
on further construction on the project,
which would have raised the level of the
dam by several metres to a point which meant
almost certain flooding of the lands and
homes of thousands of indigenous people.
The legal stay was removed earlier this
year however. The increased level of the
dam has been disastrous this monsoon with
thousands being threatened with homelessness.
In addition, many indigenous people, tired
of broken promises by the BJP-led government,
were refusing to move in advance of the
flood waters with the possibility that many
could die. The situation is ongoing.
An
opportunity arose in July to attend a briefing
meeting in the House of Commons (the lower
house of the British Parliament) in the
UK on the Ilisu dam project in Southern
Turkey. A British construction company and
possibly the UK government are involved
with this controversial project (see the
forthcoming report in WAB
11 for details).
All
in all, several WAC issues are ongoing in
Northern Europe. If anyone has any suggestions
on these or other problems in the region,
wants to draw anything to the attention
of WAC (urgent or otherwise), or has been
working on a WAC issue independently, please
do not hesitate to contact me. In particular,
if there is anyone who wants to give some
time to translate short documents of interest
to WAC members into other languages, this
would be of great help. Even better would
be anyone who can come up with a plan for
a more regularised translation network.
Most importantly, I would welcome suggestions
for and help with re-organising WAC action
and the WAC workload more openly and more
collectively in the region.
For
more details on these and all of the resolutions
passed by council at WAC4, see the WAC web-site.
Those who do not have access to the world-wide-web,
please contact me and I will download the
information and send it to you.
|
World
Archaeological Bulletin