The History, Philosophy, and Sociology of Archaeology: The Case of the Ancient Monuments Protection Act (1882) (1990)

At the conclusion of his last speech as President of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland (RAI) in 1872, Sir John Lubbock announced his intention to try to introduce legislation that would protect the ancient monuments of Great Britain. He was optimistic about his chances for success: ‘As there seems to be a general wish throughout the country to take some adequate steps for the preservation of these ancient monuments and graves of our forefathers, I am not without hope that the bill may meet with favourable reception’ (Lubbock 1872: 442). It transpired that the Ancient Monuments Protection Bill (AMPB) was to sorely try Lubbock’s patience and sap his optimism, because the Ancient Monuments Protection Act (AMPA) was not to receive royal assent until 1882, ten years after Lubbock’s resignation from the presidency of the RAIGBI. The long battle to get the first AMPA onto the statute books had entailed a great many compromises concerning the machinery of protection and the degree of state interference in the property rights of landed citizens. The most important of these compromises was made in 1881, when Lubbock changed his parliamentary tactics. After years of obstruction in the House of Commons, Lubbock abandoned his Private Member’s Bill and carried a resolution through the house that forced the Gladstone Liberal government to introduce a public bill of its own. This bill became the basis of the first AMPA, and it was a pale reflection of Lubbock’s own proposed measure, even exempting the monuments of Ireland from protection until the Ancient Monuments Protection (Ireland) Act 1892. In the second reading debate of the government’s bill (August 11, 1882) Lubbock observed: . . .As regards the present bill, while it was, no doubt, a step in the right direction, especially in providing for the appointment of an inspector, he could not hope that it would prove altogether effectual. It was natural that he should prefer the bill that had been before the house in previous sessions. . . . . . .