"Present and Future of the British Schools, Institutes and Societies Abroad": A Reply

Bill Finlayson

doi:10.5334/pia.251

Abstract

The British Schools, Institutes and Societies comprise a group which collectively receives a substantial proportion of the British Academy’s research funding but whose current work is perhaps less well-known than it should be within the UK. The scale of the Academy grants leads properly to concern that the funding represents good value for money. In all assessments so far the answer has been positive, but some negative opinions have been expressed. As some of these are based on academic urban myths or past situations that no longer apply, I appreciate this opportunity to provide a basic account of where we are now. The invitation to write this paper referred to the British Schools abroad, a term in itself a little out of date, and it is impossible to discuss these without referring to other, similar bodies. This paper is written for an archaeological audience and therefore concentrates on this aspect of the Schools’ work, but it should be stressed at the outset that archaeology is only one area of interest.

Highlights

My paper was written very much from an archaeological perspective for an archaeological audience
We do not operate within a framework of cultural diplomacy, as is typical for example of the French institutes at least in the Near East
While this may mean our budgets are smaller, it gives us a great deal more flexibility and allows us to focus on research rather than, for example, large-scale conservation programmes, where, driven by the needs of cultural diplomacy, some projects work to standards and objectives that would not match practice in the UK

Summary

Introduction

My paper was written very much from an archaeological perspective for an archaeological audience. Sarah Finke’s comment was very positive about the value of the institutions abroad, especially the role played by those with an overseas base, and how these allow reciprocity between British and host communities. Her statement regarding the key role that culture can play in development and international relations widened this still further than the specific points she raised.

Results

Conclusion