Element Two

Element Two - Review of Maritime Archaeological Archives and Access


The aim of this part of the project was to establish where maritime archaeological archives are currently held and determine their accessibility. This substantial project element required a combination of desk based research, questionnaire development and direct contact with archive holders. Six key sectors of ‘archive holders' were targeted public museums, private collections, exhibitions and non-public museums, archaeological contractors, research and societies sector, Designated Wreck Site licensees and archaeologists, and other individuals such as those reporting recovery through the Receiver of Wreck.

The questionnaires sought to establish:

  • Where maritime archives are currently held and by whom;
  • How accessible the archives are; and
  • The composition, size and extent of the archives (including nominal descriptive information about the storage/ condition of artefacts).

This was supplemented by meetings with respondents from the sectors to further quantify archives and collections.

Outcomes

The full project report is available from the ‘Reports and Publications' page  Analysis of the results demonstrated a range of issues that have a direct impact on access and security. A number of recommendations for action to improve this situation have been put forward.

Quantity of undeposited archives

Key Facts: Detailed responses to the online survey revealed the following numbers of type of archive not currently residing within public museums or archives: Objects - 48,864; Paper - 172,168; Photographs - 153,191; Video - 1,420; Sample - 4,358; Digital - 191,145. Additional summary information included thousands more archive elements, as well as over 30,000 artefacts from the RoW Amnesty report that are held in private collections.
Action: Use results to underpin enhancement of maritime archaeological archiving capacity

Accessibility and security

Key Facts:

  • A small percentage of maritime archives are currently held within public museums and repositories
  • Private museums and exhibitions play an important role in making archives accessible to the public
  • A large percentage of maritime archives have very uncertain long-term security
  • The full scale of archives not within public museums remains unquantified in detail


Actions:

  • Further quantification studies, where outcomes will enhance public access and security
  • Development of research and reference collection priorities
  • Development of acquisition approaches and appropriate resources
  • Provision of interim archive measures
  • Innovation in access


Storage and curation:

Key Facts

  • Many archives are held in private collections which do not have ready access to advice on storage and curation, and operate outside of established guidelines on collections care
  • Digital data poses particular storage and curation challenges
  • Curation in terms of heritage management suffers from a lack of clarity over roles and responsibilities for archives from the marine zone

 

Actions: Improving storage and curation

  • Detailed review of storage and curation of a range of archives not within public museums, including examples from a number of sectors (such as protected wrecks, larger regional shipwreck exhibitions and archaeological contractors) to gain a more accurate picture of storage and curation conditions
  • Review of sources of advice on marine archive storage and curation for private collections and exhibitions
  • Work with Receiver of Wreck to promote storage and curation of marine recoveries while ownership is being established
  • Review of current best practice in relation to digital data, strategies for long-term storage, copyright and licensing agreements and their applicability to a maritime context


Actions: Curatorial and management framework

  • Clarity in relation to roles and responsibilities for archives within the marine zone that is clearly articulated to all heritage agencies, local authorities, museums, archives and those undertaking the investigations
  • Curatorial input to include digital archiving is included within project briefs and conditions of consent which will allow it to be properly costed into tenders and to reach deposition

 

Guidance, support and training

There is a need for a range of measures to develop guidance, support and training in relation to marine archives across the sectors. Again, the lack of clarity over responsibility means that no single organisation has promoted maritime archaeological archives and issues specifically related to them. Hence, it is now appropriate for all organisations and agencies involved with archaeology, museums and archives to review this situation.

Actions:

  • The promotion of the AAF archive guidance (Brown 2007) and, where necessary, the development of further guidance clearly articulating the archiving process in relation to marine material, such as those being developed by the ADS for digital archive
  • A review of current education and training within available courses from vocational through to post-graduate
  • The involvement and consideration of all sectors currently producing maritime archives within the development of training, guidance and support
  • Recognition that the provision of adequate support for all sectors during the process of improving the deposition of maritime archives will require resources


Ownership, disposal and attrition of the seabed archive

Key Facts

  • The salvage system means that historic objects are treated as ‘lost property' rather than heritage assets
  • Regular, small scale recovery of artefacts from sites is gradually reducing the seabed archive with no consideration of the continued loss from historic assets
  • It is common for artefacts to be recovered from the seabed with the prime motivation being profit from their sale
  • Significant shipwreck collections have been dispersed through sale without consideration of the regional or national significance of the collections


Actions:

  • The continued inclusion of historic wreck material within the salvage regime (Merchant Shipping Act 1995) should be kept under review
  • Methods for encouraging the acquisition of historic material through the RoW system should be reviewed and developed
  • Methods for reviewing the archaeological and historic significance of material, whether individual artefacts or collections, declared to the Receiver of Wreck should be assessed to ensure archive of regional and national importance is not being dispersed


Research potential and developing coordination

Key Facts

  • Lack of coordinated collection of maritime archaeological archives has negatively affected the development of the discipline and related research interests
  • Poor communication and integration between archaeology, maritime archaeology, museums and maritime museums is a barrier to developing maritime archaeological research and associated reference collections and centres of specialism
  • Highly significant archives have been overlooked due to residing in private ownership or being difficult to access
  • Without developing access to privately held collections maritime archaeological research and understanding will be hampered and remain poorly developed


Actions

  • Review ways in which archives within private ownership (including RoW reported material) can be integrated within research programs and frameworks
  • Promote the dataset from the 2001 RoW Amnesty as a source for research and for consideration during the development of management approaches
  • Analysis of the data gathered for this project in terms of its research potential for ships and shipping of various periods
  • Articulation of responsibility for championing maritime archaeological research, to enable better integration across maritime museum, maritime history and historic ships sectors and raise the profile of the maritime archives


While it is not claimed that this survey was comprehensive of every archive it does provide a detailed snap-shot of the situation facing maritime archives and further underlines the urgency for action. The survey results have provided qualitative and quantitative data which highlight a wide range of issues affecting maritime archives.