From our President

by Felipe Criado-Boado, EAA president, on the behalf of EAA Executive Board and Committees (

Step by step, EAA reaches new milestones that demonstrate our lasting tradition, as the Association matures, accumulates and secures its considerable knowledge and experience.

This anniversary issue of TEA comes on the crest of the wave of our 2016 annual meeting. EAA members enjoyed a great meeting in the renowned city of Vilnius, with a broad, timely and relevant academic programme, blended with superb social events. The final registration figure was 1476 delegates. The organisers and EAA committees of EAA 2016 under the leadership of Prof. Albinas Kuncevicius and Dr. Agnė Žilinskaitė deserve our fulsome thanks for their splendid organisation. Successful Vilnius innovations will become appropriated and used in future EAA annual meetings, such as: i) the open forum of EAA Working Parties; ii) the transformation of the “presidential lunch” (with the leading representatives of other societies) into a working-lunch of topic-led discussion; iii) a President´s Session; and iv) a new relationship forged with EAA annual meeting volunteers.

Despite the regrettable coincidence of EAA 22nd and WAC-8, both meetings were very successful for both societies. This sort of clash is not desirable, but we were proud of the strong delegation of EAA members at Kyoto who contributed to WAC’s work on the consolidation of world archaeology. Catherine Frieman (our EJA deputy editor) acted as EAA’s official representative. She gave a splendid address about EAA during the plenary session entitled “Give the Past a Future”. She was also EAA’s representative in the approval of the “Kyoto Statement on the Future Collaboration of International Archaeological Learned Communities”.

EAA Strategic Planning

Now it is autumn, and we face a new EAA year ahead. Our most important mission in the coming months is the development of the EAA strategic plan for the coming years. The aim of this plan is to develop the collective intelligence and value of EAA as a corporate entity and build cooperative action around it. That action must be effectively engaging, useful for all members and relevant to the societies we serve.

Put in other way: cannot we imagine that any one person can embody everything that is learnt at an EAA Annual Meeting? In my view, achieving this entails the entire dilemma of the reflexive modernization (what some other call “second modernity”): how to take practical advantage of all we know, of the upper level of conscience our history has produced, for the benefit of our societies and their welfare. To catch this is what transforms EAA as a learned community.

EAA must now take full practical advantage of all we know and move forward with that knowledge. As already outlined to members, this will involve three plans: i) a Governance Plan that deals with the roles of the EAA Board, Working Parties, Committees and members; ii) a Financial Plan; and iii) a plan for the development of the Secretariat.

The process will be deployed throughout this year, presented to members in Spring for a preliminary discussion and then proposed for acceptance at the Maastricht annual meeting. Please remember that right now the Strategic Plan is open for discussion and the input of members. It is good example that the practical tools on new EAA website provide members with capacity to engage as never before.

Maastricht 2017

Now we are looking forward Maastricht, our 23rd Annual Meeting. The coincidence with the 25th anniversary of Maastricht Treaty and 25 years of the Malta Convention is crucial, especially now amidst all the changes that Europe is experiencing. We aim to take the opportunity to think about EAA’s role in the next 25 years within Europe. These topics will be discussed in organised sessions, together with the usual topics and some new topics. Maastricht will give us a chance to explore new formats, new themes and new events in EAA meetings. Some of these include: as sharing key-notes sessions; arranging an open day for the general public to come along; and developing the Exhibition towards an archaeological fair.

Barcelona 2018 and beyond

Beyond this, plans for Barcelona 2018 and Bern 2019 are now on their way (the cheaper accommodation for Bern has already been-booked by the local organizers!). At this stage, I am happy to announce that EAA 2020 will take place 26 - 30 August 2020 in Budapest, a destination I think every EAA member will appreciate. This is also an acknowledgment of the strong engagement of our Hungarian fellows in the Association from its early beginnings. UISPP recently announced its 2020 congress in Genève, a week before EAA. This is a challenge, but we must deal with it as best we can. In close cooperation with its president Koji Mizoguchi, WAC and EAA will coordinate about our respective conference in 2020 and beyond. WAC 2020 will be held in Prague but the dates are still to be decided.

Let me finish these quick words with something that deserves focus. The Board of EAA and I are very aware that low participation means lack of member representation at the AMBM. We must therefore look for new formats and media to foster debate and the approval of EAA strategies and politics. The future development of current Working Parties and Communities within EAA will play a critical role in this regard.

Go back to top

Annual Report: Minutes of the AMBM in Vilnius, 2nd September 2016

1. Opening and welcome

The EAA President Felipe Criado-Boado opened the meeting by thanking the local organisers and student helpers for having organised a very successful conference, and welcomed the attendees. He continued by presenting the proposed long-term plan for the EAA as outlined in the Framework for EAA Strategic Development, previously circulated to members, and letters from the President to members published in TEA and circulated together with the “Framework” document. The President remembered that the basic aim of the Strategic Development of EAA must be to find ways to activate all the EAA corporative intelligence in EAA decisions and policies. Members were asked for approval of the proposed long-term plan and encouraged to comment on it before mid-October; action plans on governance, finance, and Secretariat development will include members’ feedback and will be submitted to members for discussion and approval by the next AMBM in Maastricht.

Adrian Olivier remarked that back in 1994 the EAA was founded primarily to publish the Journal, and has evolved dramatically since. The goal of Olivier’s Evaluation Report (2015) was to stimulate discussion about that development and its further direction. The Framework for EAA Strategic Development responds to different points raised in the Evaluation report in different degree; the overall extent of reflection is satisfactory and the vision proposed seems ambitious but realistic. Fulfilling the vision will only be possible through members’ engagement.

Kristian Kristiansen and other members present at the Meeting supported the Executive Board in progressing the EAA Strategic Development and gave their permission to the Board to proceed with its implementation.

The President reminded the audience that European Commission published its long-awaited proposal for the European Year of Cultural Heritage 2018 with the potential implications for funding possibilities. 

2. Minutes of the AMBM in Glasgow

The minutes of the AMBM in Glasgow were published in the TEA and there were no comments by members. The minutes were approved as correct record of the previous AMBM. 

3. Matters arising from the Minutes

There were no matters arising.

4. Annual Report

EAA membership has seen extraordinary growth in the recent years, with a peak in 2014 – 2015; this year’s membership will not surmount 2014 – 2015 figures but attests a healthy membership base.

Chart 1: Number of members per year

The conference location still influences on EAA membership figures and geographic representation of membership (categories A and B), and produces a typical peak in membership numbers in the host country; it is vital that EAA conferences continue rotating throughout Europe.

Chart 2: Proportion of membership categories A and B 2012 – 2016

EAA membership is relatively young, with an average age of 43 years of age, and students comprise approximately a fifth of the total membership, albeit the category of retired members is ever increasing.

Chart 3: Proportion of membership types 2010 – 2016

The trend towards early payment of membership fees for a given year indicates tendency towards a more stable membership base over the year; early renewal not only offers the early bird rate, but also ensures that the Journal is sent to members without delays. Most membership fees are paid by credit card on-line or together with conference registration; in view of the new membership database software (iMIS) and future changes in EAA business model, members will have to renew their membership through the EAA portal first before registering for the conference. Credit card off-line payments have been very scarce over the past six years, and in order to optimise EAA’s banking profile will no longer be possible.

Chart 4: Date of membership fee payment 2010 – 2016

The corporate members of EAA in 2016 are: (in alphabetic order):

  • ASHA – Agjensia e Shërbimit Arkeologjik
  • AÚ – Archeologický ústav AV ČR Praha, v. v. i.
  • Historic EnglandHistoric Environment Scotland
  • INRAP – Institut National de Recherches Archéologiques Préventives
  • Institute of Archaeology RAS
  • Museum of Cultural History Oslo
  • NIKU – The Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research
  • OCenW - Rijksinspectie voor de Archeologie
  • Römisch-Germanische Kommission

The EAA will start using the membership module of iMIS in the 3rd week of September. The new software will allow increased interaction between members and the various boards and committees, and will provide members with enhanced services in terms of privacy, information search and sharing, and engagement. Implementation of the abstract submission management and conference modules is currently under preparation and should be ready for 2018. However, software customisation reflecting EAA’s particularities are required which makes the process lengthy.

Current EAA’s development has required reinforcement of the EAA Secretariat with Financial Administrator (Krisztína Struhár – Pavlíčková) in 2015, and a temporary assistant (Kateřina Kleinová) since June 2016.

Members present required that future AMBMs are better organised in that information including composition of the different EAA boards and committees is displayed on screen visibly (appropriate font size, screen not hidden behind the stage).

5. Statutes amendments

EAA Statutes must reflect EAA’s development over the recent past and into the future, and must adjust to legal circumstances in the country where it is registered. In order to ensure qualified discussion, the EAA Executive Board established a Statutes Working Group composed of 5 volunteer members (Elin Dalen, Mark Pearce, Thomas Meier, Axel Posluschny and Karen Waugh), chaired by Alessandro Vanzetti (Executive Board member), and supported by a Czech lawyer and the Administrator. The Statutes Working Group identified necessary Statute changes which have first been submitted to and debated by the EAA Executive Board, and thereafter revised and approved by the Statutes Committee (composed of Harald Hermansen, Kristian Kristiansen and Roger Thomas). Finally, the Statutes amendment proposal was sent by the Secretariat to members more than 60 days before AMBM, for the present discussion and vote. 

The proposed Statutes amendments refer to the following topics:  

  • Necessary matters: legal/technical issues
    • Name and definition of EAA
    • Minimum compensation for Executive Board Members to enable insurance
  • Matters moved from the Handbook and clearer definition of roles and organization
    • Handbook quoted in the Statutes
    • Better membership definition
    • Set EJA Editor as ex-Officio member (as he already in fact was)
  • Affiliate Organizations
    • Not a form of membership, but a way to increase networking
  • Digital environment for meetings and decisions, privacy, transparency
    • e-voting and e-meetings
    • Minutes accessible to members
    • privacy on personal data
  • Good governance
    • Conflicts of interest
    • Due diligence
    • Limits on expenditure decisions without Executive Board decisions
    • Accurate control on the Nomination Committee activity and decisions
    • Rules in order to make possible an appeal against NC decisions
    • Appointment of the Statutes Committee: better definition of rules  

Members present discussed and approved the proposed statutes amendments by articles with the following points: 

  • Consistency in use of terms “Annual Membership Business Meeting”, “Full Individual Member” throughout the Statutes
  • Art. 1 – approved unanimously
  • Art. V – approved unanimously
    • art V/9 – can unemployed be added to students and retired – will be taken into consideration for further Statutes amendments
    • replace “scholars” to “individuals” (1 vote against)
    • affiliate membership is category of partnership, not membership (not to compete with corporate membership) – 5 members of the affiliate organisation must be EAA members and agree to guarantee affiliation of their organisation
  • Art VI – approved unanimously
  • Art VII – approved unanimously
  • Art IX – approved unanimously
  • Art X – approved unanimously
  • Art XII – approved unanimously
  • Art IVX – approved unanimously
    • change “election” to “appointment” in § 1   

6. Financial Report
Margaret Gowen, the EAA Treasurer, presented the financial report for 2015 and budgets for 2016 – 2018. She commended Krisztína Pavlíčková, EAA Financial Administrator, for her diligence and her significant achievements in her first year of work for the EAA during which she has completely integrated EAA’s book-keeping and management accounting and provided the Treasurer with detailed financial analysis of costs and cost projections. Members are welcome to address any queries about details of the financial report and budgets to them both.

EAA had a healthy income of €211,494 in 2015, generated principally by membership subscription assisted by the success of the 2015 Annual Meeting in Glasgow, EJA Editorial budget and royalties generated by EJA from Maney, and a small concluding payment from the Disco project. Expenditure in 2015 was heavily influenced by the costs of iMIS Module 1 installation, customisation and associated work. In addition, EAA began its strategic development, related to legacy decisions, and this involved payment for the Evaluation Report, additional meetings, plus legal and accounting advice.

In 2015 EAA accounts were in deficit to the value of ‐€32,972. The early part of the year’ expenditure was focused on the results of evaluation, review of that report, consultation with members and progressing strategic development thinking. The number of responses to the Evaluation Report received was disappointingly low. It was stressed that this report and all subsequent reports from the Executive Board to members are live documents requiring members’ engagement.

Chart 5: Financial report 2015

2016 is a year when we anticipate a lower number of conference delegates and members and therefore lower income; this year also EAA goes ‘live’ with its new membership management software iMIS (the greatest item of expenditure in 2016). Estimated income in 2016 is €166,400; estimated expenditure is €220,447; resulting in a deficit of ‐€54,047. The opening balance in 2016 was €71,392. It will decrease to an estimated closing balance of €17,345 at the end of 2016.

Between 2016 and 2018 EAA must further invest in offering more services to its members – in particular securing and developing its administration, managing more (if not all) of its conference organization and abstract handling, developing its strategic planning, and growing and diversifying its income into at least 3 different sources (aim to get max. 60% of total income from membership fees). In addition, EAA must control its expenditure. The three‐year budget demonstrates that EAA’s finances will recover over the three‐year period. The 3‐year budget presupposes a modest increase in membership subscription rates (there has been no increase since 2009) and increase in membership numbers. If EAA can increase its number of members – and its annual income – it will be able to balance its income and expenditure and focus on building up its balance sheet once again, thereby facilitating the development of its executive and administrative capacity. There must however be an alternative action plan if the above goals are not achieved.

The 2015 financial report and budgets for 2016 and 2017 were approved by members present.

Chart 6: Budgets 2016 – 2018 

7. Membership fee level for the next year

The Treasurer proposed an increase of €10 for A category membership fees; members present approved the increase (2 against, 4 abstained). The Treasurer proposed two options for B category membership fees: either an increase of €5, or not increasing the membership fees for B category; members present approved the increase of €5 (5 against, 8 abstained).

The Treasurer proposed to extend B category membership fees to Portugal and Greece starting from 2017; members present approved the extension (0 against, 2 abstained). Eligibility for B category membership fees will be reviewed every 3 years. Members present approved that students who renew for three years will receive a discount to the value of €5 annually, whether or not their student status changes within the three years (0 against, 1 abstained).

The existing ‘early bird’ discount of €5 annually for all renewals prior to 31 March of the year of payment will be maintained. The new membership fees as of 1 January 2017 will be:

Chart 7: Membership fees as of 1 January 2017

8. OMF report
Eszter Bánffy, Chair of the OMF Board of Trustees, presented the OMF report. At the time of its establishment in 2013, the OMF was mandated to

  • act for the benefit of the Association,promote the development of archaeological research and the exchange of archaeological information in Europe,
  • promote the management and interpretation of the archaeological heritage of Europe,
  • promote proper ethical and scientific standards for archaeological work,
  • promote the interests of professional archaeologists in Europe,
  • support and serve the membership of the European Association of Archaeologists.
  • The Trustees (Eszter Bánffy, Carsten Paludan Müller, and Peter F. Biehl) and the Auditor (Adrian Olivier) recognised that there is a completely revised understanding of the financial situation and prospect for the EAA and consequently for the OMF, as compared to what was originally envisaged. Not only can no additional funds from the EAA for the OMF be expected over the next two years at least, but OMF may need to support EAA actions that later may result in a surplus, which can be placed at the OMF and used then for the benefit of members. While preliminary plans have been discussed with the EAA Executive Board, members‘ comments or suggestions are welcome.

9. EJA Progress Report
Robin Skeates, EJA Editor, summarised the development of the Journal over the past year, and thanked the Editorial Board – and the stepping down members in particular - for their work.
Following a tender and evaluation of four bids received, Cambridge University Press was selected as EJA publisher from 2017 onwards. The Editor and Deputy Editor, Cate Frieman, are working closely with CUP and continue to receive high number of new submissions, which results in a healthy 50 – 60% rejection rate. EJA articles are frequently cited; out of 146 archaeological journals, EJA ranks 12th.

10. THEMES monographs
Eszter Bánffy and Kristian Kristiansen, THEMES Editors, recalled that two volumes (Assembling Çatalhöyük edited by Arkadiusz Marciniak and Ian Hodder, and Trypillia Mega Sites and European Prehistory, 4100-3400 BCE edited by Johannes Müller, Knut Rassmann and Mikhail Videiko) have been published since the establishment of the monograph series in 2015. A third volume (Going West? The appearance of Neolithic innovations between Bosporus and Carpathians edited by Agathe Reingruber, Zoi Tsirtsoni and Petranka Nedelcheva) is currently in print, and there are six further publication projects in the pipeline.

Taylor&Francis continue as THEMES Publisher until 2018. The current series publication plan with Taylor&Francis conforms to the Editors‘ vision of 1 - 2 high-quality volumes per year. The Editors will aim to identify themes that are unique and marketable (and hence generating revenue for the EAA). Taylor&Francis committed to produce cheaper paper-back version after 18 months of the publication of hard-cover.

11. TEA report
Katharina Rebay-Salisbury and Roderick Salisbury summarised their first year as TEA Editors and plans for TEA future. While the newsletter must keep the achievable PDF version, it should become more interactive, allowing, for example, comments on TEA articles. The iMIS system and new website will facilitate this effort. Members are urged to contribute reports and opinion pieces on events, and to consider political essays, etc. The proposed debate topic for 2016/2017 is Open Access and the ownership of archaeological information. The deadline for submissions to the Winter issue is 15 January.

12. Reports from the Working Parties, Committees and Round Tables
Nurcan Yalman, EAA Vice-President, introduced reports from the below EAA Working Parties and Committees:

  • MERC (Dries Tys)
  • Professional Associations in Archaeology Committee (Mark Spanjer)
  • Committee on Archaeological Legislation and Organisation in Europe (Maria Pia Guermandi and Jean-Paul Demoule)
  • Working Group on Archaeology and Gender in Europe (Nona Palincas)
  • Working Party integrating the Management of Archaeological Heritage and Tourism (Annemarie Willems)
  • Archaeology and the EU Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (Karen Waugh)
  • Political Strategies for the EAA Committee (Sophie Hüglin and Rai Karl)
  • Committee on the Teaching and Training of Archaeologists (Rai Karl)
  • The Nearch (New scenarios for a community-involved archaeology) Project (Kai Salas Rossenbach)

Two Working Groups have not reported at the AMBM:

  • EAA and EAC Working Group on Farming, Forestry and Rural Land Management
  • Working Group in Public Archaeology

​Working Parties and Committees are urged to submit reports to TEA and to actively use their web page in iMIS. A pre-conference session of Working Parties and Committees representatives will be held in Maastricht. The EAA Executive Board has stated within the Strategic Plan that it intends to use the Working Parties and Committees expertise more effectively in informing its decisions.

13. Election results
According to the Statutes, the EAA Executive Board consists of (max.) 10 elected members: 3 Officers, an Incoming President elected one year before the term of office, and 6 Ordinary Members (one of them appointed as Vice-President). This year, the posts of Treasurer, two Ordinary Executive Board members, and a Nomination Committee member become vacant. The period of service is 3 years and the elected candidates will serve from 2016 to 2019.

The Nomination Committee (composed of Tim Darvill, Arkadiusz Marciniak and Margarita Díaz-Andreu) met on 6 May and divided the nominations received in groups based on gender and country. Personalised election materials were circulated via e-mail on 7 July. The 413 valid votes (332 received on-line, 79 at the conference ballot box, 2 by e-mail, none by post) were counted by EAA Secretary Marc Lodewijckx, Nomination Committee member Margarita Díaz-Andreu, TEA Editor Katharina Rebay-Salisbury, and EAA Financial Administrator Krisztína Pavlíčková. The elected candidates are shown in bold below.

Gowen, Margaret: 390 received votes
23 abstained


Gurova, Maria: 143 received votes
Lazar, Irena: 107 received votes
Yalman, E. Nurcan: 141 received votes
22 abstained

Briggs, Stephen C.: 118 received votes
Potrebica, Hrvoje: 154 received votes
Salas Rossenbach, Kai: 124 received votes
17 abstained

Arnold, Bettina: 233 received votes
Scarre, Chris: 167 votes
13 abstained

The EAA congratulates the successful candidates, and thanks those who were not elected for standing and for their continuing interest in the work of the Association.

14. New appointments
The following appointments were made in 2016:
EJA Editorial Board
Daniela Hofmann
Eileen Murphy
EJA Reviews Editor: Marta Díaz-Guardamino
EJA Deputy Reviews Editor: David Orton
Heritage Prize Committee: Marie-Louise Stig Sorensen

15. Welcome to the new Board and Committee Members and thanks to the outgoing Board and Committee Members

The EAA welcomed the newly elected and appointed Board and Committee members and thanked the outgoing ones:
EAA Executive Board: E. Nurcan Yalman
Nomination Committee: Tim Darvill
EJA Reviews Editor: Estella Weiss-Krejci
EJA Editorial Board: Arkadiusz Marciniak, Necmi Karul
Heritage Prize Committee: Carsten Paludan-Müller

16. Location of future Annual Meetings
The next conferences will be held in the following cities:
23rd: 2017 Maastricht, The Netherlands
24th: 2018 Barcelona, Spain
25th: 2019 Bern, Switzerland

17. Announcement of the next Annual Meeting
Gilbert Soeters invited all EAA members to attend the 23rd EAA conference in Maastricht, to be held on 30 August – 3 September 2017. The conference web page is live at and provides all necessary information. Call for session submissions will open in October 2016.

The themes of the 2017 conference will be:

  • Twenty five years after Maastricht: Archaeology and Europe’s future
  • The Valletta Convention: the next twenty five years
  • Transdisciplinary approaches to archaeology
  • The third science revolution in archaeology
  • Archaeology, art and artefacts
  • Comparing regional archaeologies
  • Other submissions

Session organisers decide how to fill their timetable, session formats will include:

  • Key note speakers
  • Traditional 20 minutes
  • 10 minutes talk
  • 6 sheets, 6 minutes
  • Pecha kucha
  • Round tables
  • Poster sessions​​

The social programme will include an Annual Barbecue to replace the Annual Dinner and make it affordable for more delegates, a range of excursions and side events.

18. Any Other Business
Since there was no other business, the Meeting was closed.

Go back to top​​

EAA Strategic Development Plan

The EAA is striving to further its aims and develop as the foremost representative archaeological association in Europe for the future progress of the discipline, the benefit of archaeological heritage and the welfare of its members.

Your input is essential to achive this! Please review and comment on the EAA Strategic Development Plan here  (you must sign in in order to post comments) or send your observations to the EAA Administrator.

Thank you for engaging for the future of the EAA.

Go back to top

EAA 27th Annual Meeting, Budapest, Hungary, 26 - 30 August 2020

by László Borhy (


Fig. 1: Eötvös Loránd University ©

The 26th Annual Meeting of the EAA will be hosted at the Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE) in Budapest in late August 2020. The host institute of the conference is Hungary’s largest university with 380 year old traditions. Archaeology plays a key role at the University: the Institute of Archaeological Sciences, whose history goes back to 1777, is a highly active community both in scientific work and in social life. The planned conference venues are the main building of the University and the campus of Faculty of Humanities; the buildings are located very close to each other in the historical city centre. Restaurants, cafes and university canteens are found in the vicinity.

Why Budapest?

Fig. 2: Budapest ©

Budapest is the capital of Hungary, in the centre of Europe. It possesses Roman ruins, still operating Turkish baths, the heritage of the Gothic and Baroque periods, as well as architectural masterpieces of the Art Nouveau and Bauhaus. The city is rich in archaeological and historical monuments and museums. It is easily accessible by any kind of transport; by air, on land, and on water. Budapest has an international airport (BUD), two main international railway stations, and hydrofoil on the Danube. The local public transport is also well-organised. The infrastructure of the city offers a range of different standards from luxury hotels to B&B accommodations and university dormitories.

Fig. 3: Hungary, Danube Valley ©

Why Hungary?
The territory of Hungary lies in the borders of different worlds and histories. Sometimes it connects, sometimes it separates the different cultures and zones of Europe. For thousands of years our land was a transition zone between the western and eastern type of development. Here met the southeast European type tell settlements and the world of Central European enclosures in the 5th millennium BC; here was the limes of the Roman Empire in the 1st–4th centuries and the region was part of the Ottoman Empire between the 16th and 18th centuries. The main themes of the conference will be focusing on this phenomenon.

László Borhy, CMHAS, in the name of the host institution. Professor of Roman provincial archaeology, Head of Department of Classical and Roman Archaeology, Director of Institute of Archaeological Sciences, Dean of Faculty of Humanities, Eötvös Loránd University

Go back to top

WAC@30 – Give the past a future. Some comments from Europe

 by Catherine J. Frieman and Felipe Criado-Boado (,

The following is the text of a short speech given by the first author at WAC-8 in Kyoto, Japan on Mon 29 August, 2016. Prof. Koji Mizoguchi invited representatives from various international archaeological associations to address the World Archaeology Congress on the future of archaeology as part of a celebration of the World Archaeology Congress’ 30th anniversary. It was written jointly with EAA President Felipe Criado-Boada and can be watched here.

I am honoured to speak today on behalf of the president and the rest of the Executive Board of the EAA who are unable to attend WAC this year due to the coincident scheduling of our own annual meeting.

Archaeology has a long history in Europe, but it is a history of national traditions, endeavours and insights. A pan-European vision of European archaeology was left to the few and the extraordinary—Oscar Montelius, Gordon Childe, and their ilk. The European Association of Archaeologists was only founded in 1994. So, we are actually nearly 10 years too young to be commenting on the last 30 years!

Nevertheless, I hope that these thoughts drawn from the EAA’s past, present and goals for the future are helpful.

The impulse to found the EAA sprang from the same hopeful and forward thinking cultural moment out of which the European Union was birthed. Our founding principles reflect that spirit of unity and optimism:

  • To promote the development of archaeological research and the exchange of archaeological information in Europe.
  • To promote the management and interpretation of European archaeological heritage.
  • To promote proper ethical and scientific standards for archaeological work.
  • To promote the interests of professional archaeologists in Europe.
  • To promote cooperation with other organisations with similar aims.

Since then, the EAA has developed in leaps and bounds, drawing in archaeologists—both professional and academic—and heritage professionals from across Europe, as well as bringing in colleagues from neighbouring regions and, like myself, those who live and work further abroad but who study Europe’s past. We have about 2200 members from 50 different countries.

Since 1999 we have had a consultative status with the Council of Europe, giving us a platform from which to advocate for policies supporting the protection of cultural heritage and promotion of archaeology and heritage in EU member countries.

For 22 years we have aimed to be a society which both promotes and represents archaeology, archaeologists and heritage professionals within our own expansive and expanding definition of Europe. Moreover we actively involve ourselves with those social and political problems that affect Archaeology just as they affect the wider world. In less than a year, for instance, we have had to react with public statements and actions to terrorist attacks in France, the UK’s Brexit referendum and, recently, the leadership crisis in Turkey.

At this point we would particularly like to acknowledge and celebrate our many Turkish members, who hosted our annual conference in Istanbul in 2014 and who are currently working within a difficult and at times hostile political situation.

Among our successes as a society we count: our high ranked journal, our widely read newsletter, our newly launched monograph series, our increasing membership and attendance at conferences, our formal links with national/international archaeological societies and heritage organisations, and our successful efforts to improve European heritage policy.

As we look to the future, however, and as has been noted in the abstract for this plenary session, the position of archaeology and the significance of protecting cultural heritage seem less sure than in previous years.

Despite the widespread public appreciation and cultural prestige of ancient remains in Europe, it is undeniable that a considerable segment of the population feels a certain aversion to heritage management, particularly when this is identified most strongly with bureaucratic structures that exist to prevent things from happening. This situation differs from country to country; but a priori conservationism has caused, albeit indirectly, a public disaffection towards Heritage and Archaeology. The Great Recession of 2008 and its after effects have only exacerbated these problems. In addition, the Recession had a dramatic effect on employment and prospects of the commercial activity and professional archaeology/heritage which are, frankly, some of the weakest links in the archaeological system.

Moreover, the changing political and social contexts in modern Europe look very different to the Europe of the early and mid 1990s—with optimism about the European project replaced by cynicism, and a spirit of unification confronted with reborn and politically empowered ethno-nationalist movements in many countries. The British referendum to leave the EU has shaken our sense of unity and archaeologists are only one community trying to suss out the consequences and the best path forward.

And yet, we are not willing to relinquish our ideals or adjust them downwards in some sort of pessimistic pragmatism. As our new president argued recently, instead of yielding to these negative pressures, we hope to position the EAA as a bulwark against them, espousing new ambitions for archaeology, promoting activism within the archaeological and heritage communities, working towards a closer integration of archaeologists and heritage professionals, and working to increase the value and profile of archaeological and cultural heritage and the necessity of protecting it.

In looking to the future of the EAA, both on the short and the long term, we are attempting to plan for an even more inclusive and empowered archaeology and heritage sector in Europe. We aspire to become more representative, expanding our organisational remit to a greater proportion of the European archaeological community and making more liberal use of democratising technologies like twitter, open repositories and other digital platforms to better represent our community and engage with individuals among it. In particular, we are aware that the younger generation of archaeologists and heritage professionals are among the most precariously employed and in need of institutional support. We are currently building the framework of what we hope will be a vibrant and supportive student network within the EAA, and we look forward to planning our future with the future of the current student and very early career generation in mind.

We also are building on the political endeavours of the last two decades. We see it as a key part of our mission to continue to actively promote the value of all aspects of archaeological research and the research of related disciplines and we hope to provide meaningful contributions and solutions to debates around the big issues facing humanity. In order to achieve these aims in the future, we have envisioned for ourselves an ambitious and vocal role within the future European ‘project’. We are seeking a more central place (both figuratively and literally, within the offices of the EU) in the dialogue concerning European cultural and intellectual life and civil society as well as a more visible and active position within European heritage policy formulation. Moreover, through greater public engagement, we believe that the EAA can increase its relevance to the European project; and we are confident that Archaeology, archaeologists, and the EAA itself can play a growing role within it.

Finally, and perhaps most relevant to this audience. A core element of our future planning lies in ever stronger collaboration with our peers within Europe and beyond. Archaeology and heritage are international disciplines and we see no way of ethically moving forward without wider collaboration and consultation. In the same way we are building on our existing ties to heritage organisations throughout Europe, we celebrate our developing relationships with international archaeology and heritage bodies as well as developing links to societies representing and promoting allied fields: anthropology, architecture, STS, etc.

To end on a personal observation, as an American with a European doctorate and research profile who is now based in Australia, I would like to observe that while we archaeologists of different nationalities may sometimes use different methodologies, and while our stakeholders and the impact and political implications of our work can be profoundly different, in both WAC and EAA I have always found a shared ideal to conduct our research and practice to the highest ethical standards and to use our knowledge of the past to make the present and future better. Thank you.

Go back to top

Rising citations and ranking for the European Journal of Archaeology

by Robin Skeates, General Editor, EJA (

Citations of articles published in the EAA’s European Journal of Archaeology have risen dramatically since 2010, according to data produced by Scopus and published by Scimago Journal Rankings ( As a consequence, the EJA is currently ranked 12th out of 246 listed archaeology journals. This is an impressive achievement, and testimony to the hard work of the EJA’s Editorial Board and of our publishers.

We welcome new submissions and remain committed to maintaining the breadth of the journal, to cover a wide range of periods, regions and themes. We are particularly keen to publish articles on topics that are currently under-represented in the EJA, including archaeological heritage, museum archaeology, Classical archaeology, Palaeolithic archaeology, European archaeology beyond Europe, and digital archaeology. To submit a new paper, please visit the EJA’s webpage hosted by Editorial Manager (

Go back to top

Proposal for an EAA working party on archaeology and the EU Environmental Impact Assessment Directive

by Roger Thomas, Karen Waugh ( and Gill Hey  

The EU’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive is the only piece of EU legislation which is directly and substantially concerned with the archaeological heritage. The EIA Directive has wide implications for the practice of archaeology in Europe, and thus for the aims of EAA. It is therefore proposed to establish an EAA Working Party to examine issues concerning EIA and archaeology in Europe. The EAA Board’s approval is being sought for this proposal, further details of which are outlined below.

The European Union (EU) Directive on ‘Environmental Impact Assessment’ (EIA) is the only piece of EU legislation which directly relates to archaeology and cultural heritage and deals with it in any substantial way. The Directive, and the manner of its implementation in the different member states of the EU, reflects a key issue for the EAA (and, indeed, for the EU): how to achieve the common societal goal of archaeological heritage protection and management against a background of widely varying local situations and approaches.

A large portion of development-led archaeology in Europe takes place on projects which are subject to EIA. The EIA Directive, therefore has a direct impact on almost everyone whose work is connected with development-led archaeology. By association, it has an impact on almost everyone who works in, or on, European archaeology for two main reasons. The first is the fact that the Directive is responsible for the discovery and investigation of very large amounts of new archaeological sites and material. The second, because it is an important EU-wide legal instrument, is that it prompts comparison of approaches in methods and practice. This suggests that greater harmonisation might be needed. The Directive has potential implications for the archaeological profession that extend well beyond the body of individual development projects that require EIA.

For all of these reasons, it is proposed to establish an EAA working party to consider the implication of the Directive for archaeological practice in Europe. This proposal comes out of discussions held at EAA Annual Conferences at Istanbul (2014) and Glasgow (2015). It also follows up the earlier Interreg-funded ‘PlanArch’ projects between partners England, Belgium, The Netherlands and Germany. The PlanArch guiding principles for cultural heritage in Environmental Impact Assessments represented a very important step forward and were subsequently adopted by the EAA (see report by John Williams in TEA no. 24 Winter2005/2006). The full scope of the proposed Working Party’s activities will depend on whether or not it is possible to obtain external funding for project work (similar to the PlanArch projects, for example). At this stage, the following activities are proposed:

  • to review the operation of the Directive in relation to archaeology and cultural heritage, and to make recommendations on how the Directive itself, its implementation, or both, could be improved.
  • to see how far EIA regulations can be used to improve the integration of the needs of spatial planning and research. The objective here would be to promote a more useful or relevant archaeological “return on investment” not only for the developer (accurate risk identification and management), but for archaeological ‘knowledge gain’ and ultimately, the wider public good. The Directive’s concept of ‘off-setting’ (a gain of one kind – knowledge – to off-set harm of another kind – the loss of physical deposits) is very relevant in this regard.
  • One specific (and important) aim of the proposed Working Party is to ensure that EAA is well positioned to make considered and well-informed responses to future consultations by the European Commission on any proposed amendments to the EIA Directive. This will involve an examination of the Directive in relationship to the Valletta Convention, to identify the extent to which they align with each other, and to make proposals on what changes should be sought in the event that either instrument is revised in the future.
  • to examine the Faro Convention (the framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society, 2005) in relation to the EIA Directive, with a view to identifying whether the Directive (or its implementation) would benefit from future amendment to reflect the provisions of the Faro Convention.
  • to make contact with EAC and agree the scope of possible collaboration on this issue. (EAC represents state heritage services, which are obviously directly concerned with the impact of national spatial planning systems, of which EIA is a part, on the archaeological heritage).
  • to establish a network of EAA members, covering as many EU states as possible, who can report on the application of EIA to spatial planning and heritage protection in their countries. (It should be noted that the EIA Directive is implemented through the domestic land-use legislation of each member state. It is accepted that the task of tracking how the Directive has been implemented in each country would be a major task. The Working Party needs to be realistic about what can be achieved in terms of analysing different national arrangements).
  • to consider whether there is a need for a larger funded project to examine the implementation and effectiveness of the Directive in future. If such a need is found, to outline the scope of such a study, and to identify possible sources of funding  for it.
  • The discussions at Istanbul and Glasgow revealed an appetite for further discussion of this important matter.
  • to report regularly to the EAA Board, and to the ABM, on the progress of proposed Working Party’s activities.


The establishment of this EAA Working Party requires formal approval of members at the next Annual Business Meeting in 2016, but preparatory work by a ‘shadow’ group  over the next 12 months can establish the future scope and outline a potential work programme for an EIA Working Party. We hope to be able to discuss these points in more detail prior to the Annual Business Meeting in a session to be organised in Vilnius.

We now welcome comments from any EAA members who would like to participate further in this discussion and would particularly welcome suggestions to be included in the session to be proposed for Vilnius next September.

Reactions, comments and suggestions can be sent to Karen ( who will act temporarily as coordinator until we’ve set up a more formal arrangement.

Go back to top

Calendar for EAA members November 2016 – March 2017

  • 30 November - Deadline for session and round table proposals for the 2017 EAA conference in Maastricht, Netherlands
  •  1 December - Registration for the 2017 EAA conference in Maastricht opens
  • 31 December - End of the 2016 EAA membership (log in the members’ section valid till 31 January 2017)
  • 1 January - Beginning of the 2017 EAA membership (log in the members’ section valid since 1 December 2016)
  • 15 January - Deadline for submissions to TEA winter issue (to be published in late January)
  • 22 January - Deadline for conference registration and 2017 membership fee payment for session organisers
  • 31 January - Announcement of provisional programme for the 2017 EAA conference in Maastricht; Submission of paper & poster proposals for the 2017 EAA conference in Maastricht opens
  • early February - Call for nominations to the EAA election circulated to the members
  • 15 March - Deadline for submission of paper & poster proposals for the 2017 EAA conference in Maastricht

Go back to top

Upcoming Events

  • 19-21 December 2016 - Theoretical Archaologz Group (TAG0 annual conference, Southampton, United Kingdom


  • 30 January - 1 February 2017: Nearching Factory, an active workshop to create new scenarios for sustainable practices in Archaeology (NEARCH project event), Santiago de Compostela, Spain; follow it on Facebook
  • 5 - 8 January 2017: Joint Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) and the Society for Classical Studies (SCS), Toronto, Canada
  • 9 - 11 March 2017: EAC Annual Meeting, Athens, Greece
  • 29 March - 2 April 2017: SAA 82nd Annual Meeting, Vancouver, Canada
  • 19 - 21 April 2017: CIfA conference "Archaeology, a global profession", Newcastle, United Kingdom
  • 30 August - 3 September 2017: EAA 23rd Annual Meeting, Maastricht, Netherlands


  • 22 - 26 May 2018: 19th International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Cologne/Bonn, Germany
  • 10 - 16 June 2018: XVIII° UISPP mondial congress, Paris, France
  • 5 - 9 September 2018: EAA 24th Annual Meeting, Barcelona, Spain
  • November 2018: 5th Congress of the PanAfrican Archaeological Association of Prehistory and Related Studies, Rabat, Morocco


  • 4 - 8 September 2019: EAA 25th Annual Meeting, Bern, Switzerland


  • 26 - 30 August 2020: EAA 26th Annual Meeting, Budapest, Hungary


Go back to top