English Heritage in the United Kingdom - Essay Example

Introduction English Heritage in the United Kingdom is not just a romantic concept. Since the early 1980's, it has been the unofficial for a government body that is charged with maintaining and documenting the historical environment of England. The Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England, commonly referred to as "English Heritage", has extensive supervisory and organizational responsibilities. According to the organizations website; "English Heritage works in partnership with the central government departments, local authorities, voluntary bodies and the private sector to: 1). Conserve and enhance the historic environment, 2). Broaden public access to the heritage, 3). Increase people's understanding of the past" (Who Are We 2005). The Heritage achieves these goals and objectives by implementing various standards, by acting as a national and international champion for the heritage, by giving grants for the conservation of historic buildings, monuments and landscapes and maintaining registers for England's most significant historic buildings, monuments and landscapes. They also advise on the preservation of the historic environment, encourage broader public involvement, and promote education and research. They do these things while still caring for Stonehenge and over 400 other historic properties and maintaining the National Monuments Record. The organization also generates income for the benefit of the historic environment. The Heritage has come under attack lately for some of its actions, but at the same time has been lauded for its protection of historic buildings. There are some who believe this protection is the noblest and most worthwhile of all the organization's ventures. "The richness of this country's architectural heritage plays an influential part in our sense of national and regional identity" (About Listed Buildings 2006). These national treasures are 'finite assets' that connect the ages, protect our ancestor's memories and preserve our heritage. Part of Britain's inheritance is all the structures that identify us as Britain. "English Heritage has the task of identifying and protecting this inheritance in England. The main means of doing this is by listing recommending buildings for inclusion on statutory lists of buildings of special architectural or historic interest" (About Listed Buildings 2006). This paper will appraise the English Heritage protection system by examining its brief history and its present responsibilities. Along with that aspect, the paper will also show how the Heritage' various policies are perceived by the public. It will critique the current aspects and roles of English Heritage and outline opportunities for reform , the continuing reformation process that was initiated several years ago and continues to take place currently and how those reformations are changing the face of the organization. Also considered in the paper will be the group's various accomplishments, technological advancements in the system and future goals or the organization. Reforming the Organization In 2004, Heritage Minister Andrew McIntosh announced a number of reformation rights for owners of 'period properties'. Theses rights included statutory consultation and a new right of appeal. That these rights had to be announced at all is evidence that the reformation process had to be initiated. There have been many groups and individuals through the years calling for a more open and disclosing organization, but the organization seemed to defend itself by ignoring these calls. A study conducted by DCMS in July 2003 stated the following; "more than four in every five respondents favoured a single unified list of all heritage assets, and almost 100% supported plans to make the listing process more open" (DCMS 2004 pg 2). In considering these group's and individuals calling for the reforms other announcements at the same time concerning the reformation program included the creation of a new 'super register' of all protected buildings, monuments, parks, gardens and battlefields. The reforms were quoted as the most fundamental programme of reform that Britain's heritage protection regime had ever undergone. In announcing theses newly created standards McIntosh said; "Our current system of heritage protection is second to none. If it did not exist, the landscape of England today would be a vastly different, and infinitely poorer one" (Looking 2004). He went on to reiterate what the studies had shown was that "we need a more open, more effective system. We need to enable and manage change..We need to breathe new life into an old regime" (Looking 2004). If what the Minister was looking to do was to 'breathe new life into an old regime' these reformations certainly caused that to happen. Not since 1970 when a criterion for building selection for listing was established so that the lists could be updated, were such sweeping changes made. Background/ Responsibilities of Heritage Protection Systems (HPS) The Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England is a non-departmental, government sponsored public organization supported by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) (Wikipedia English Heritage 2006). The Town and Country Planning Act of 1932 introduced the first implementation of building preservation regulations. The first list of England's historic buildings was provided in the 1950's and 1960's for all areas. The criterion for building selection for listing that was established in 1970 was done so that the lists could be updated. This step was in preparation for impending legislation. "The Secretary of State for the Environment is required to compile lists of buildings of special architectural or historic interest, for the guidance of local planning authorities in the exercise of their own planning functions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1971" (About Listed Buildings 2006). The role played by English Heritage is the stewardship of important historical and archaeological sites with powers and responsibilities detailed in the National Heritage Act of 1983. Established in 1984, the organization gives advice regarding the registration and protection of historic places to Parliament through the Secretary of State for the DCMS. In its duties overseeing manmade structures, English Heritage also bears considerable accountability regarding conservation projects. Heritage works together with another non-departmental public body, English Nature, which promotes the conservation of wildlife and unspoiled lands within England. The question then is why was there such an outcry against English Heritage if their major role was stewardship over historical sites Part of the reason why was because before 2004, there was no unified list of these projects, buildings, or historical sites. There also was no right of appeal, and no public input was allowed at all. That 96% of the respondents to a study supported making the listing system more open, and 87% said there should be a right of appeal speaks volumes for the way the system was previously. With the introduction of public consultation in respect to applications to list, the organization is attempting to promote transparency and openness, and in order to ensure that listings do not happen while that public consultation is being requested, a protection order is placed on each asset until a decision is made. "Listing is not meant to fossilise a building. Its long-term interests are often best served by putting it to good use. If this cannot be the one it was designed for, a new use may have to be found. Listing ensures that the architectural and historic interest of the building is carefully considered before any alterations, either outside or inside, are agreed" (About Listed Buildings 2006). English Heritage selects a building to be listed for a variety of reasons. The structure may have played a part in the life of a famous person, has architectural value, was the scene for an important event or is important simply for its age. The older a building is, the more likely it is to be listed. "All buildings built before 1700 which survive in anything like their original condition are listed, as are most built between 1700 and 1840. After that date, the criteria become tighter with time, so that post-1945 buildings have to be exceptionally important to be listed" (About Listed Buildings 2006). Another reformation taking place was that a new unified "Register of Historic Sites and Building of England" was created that would bring together listing, scheduling and registration. The new register would incorporate World Heritage Sites and contain a 'local section' recording conservation areas, local lists and registers. This new register looks to appease those respondents to the above listed study who believed that creating a unified list should be a primary goal of the organization. 87% of the respondents to that study believed that way, which would lead the reader to believe that it was quite important to the public Along with that responsibility to list buildings that are to be preserved another of the responsibilities of the English Heritage is to administer funds in an effort to preserve and improve England's historic buildings, many of which are currently listed. In one of the organization's many ongoing efforts to do so, the following announcement was trumpeted on the their website; "English Heritage and the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) announced on 1 March 2006 a package of grants worth 17.5 million for repairs to 147 Grade I and II* listed churches and chapels across England." (17.5 Million 2006). The articles goes on to say, "Since 2002 62 million of repair grants has been awarded to more than 700 historic places of worship through the joint scheme, which is the largest single source of funds for work of this kind". The article continues by stating that the grants unveiled were earmarked to help repair nearly 150 historic places of worship. Some of these places of worship have been at the heart of their communities for centuries. It further stated that the earmarked funds were not nearly enough to pay for many more needed improvements to national heritage sites. In order to facilitate these additional repairs and maintenance for other buildings they also announced a campaign "to quantify the scale of the problem and propose solutions, and to promote a greater recognition of the work done by devoted volunteers to keep these invaluable parts of our national heritage alive" (17.5 Million 2006). A big portion of the support that English Heritage provides is not to just list the buildings, sites or monuments as historical areas, but they also provide funds to improve and maintain them, and oftentimes they partner with other organizations in order to raise those funds. "The substantial financial support English Heritage provides to church buildings and other places of worship through this scheme is a drop in the ocean compared with the huge amounts raised by dedicated volunteers and popular support. Places of worship are close to the heartbeat of our communities - the baptisms, weddings and funerals of the people we love take place in these buildings. This is why so many people, believers and non-believers alike, care about places of worship and, confronted with their imminent loss, invariably rally around to save them" (17.5 Million 2006). The organization also educates the public on the need for both financial and volunteer support that ensures the continuity of such historic sites. "The key to long-term security for historic places of worship is going to be about understanding the nature of the problem properly, tackling it rationally and methodically, yes, partly through more money, but also by helping people on the ground to help themselves by offering support and expertise where it is most needed" (17.5 Million 2006). This was another area that was addressed by the reformations. Educating the public can be done quite easily by providing information and a forum in which the public can listen, hear, see and question the different processes and programs conducted by English Heritage. In regards to that some of the reformations recommended were that a comprehensive pack for owners be created that would include a "summary of importance" that would set out the reasons for listing, a map which would indicate the extent of the listing, and general information on designation and how to seek planning consent. McIntosh had this to say about Heritage's attempts to provide this information and why this particular reformation was so important, "The government wants to make it easier for the owners and tenants of heritage properties to take pride in their conservation and care. One way to do this is to provide better information about what makes their property special and how to keep it in good condition" (Looking 2004). McIntosh, in his report went on to say that they would offer one-stop shopping for applications and enquiries, they would provide information in a clear and comprehensible form and they would also provide opportunities to request a review of listing decisions. "Taken as a whole, the proposed new system will allow us to work in closer partnership with others, making it easier to safeguard the past and build for the future" (Looking 2004). Government policy dictates that English Heritage be an unelected body that the general public may join. Membership does not imply a voice in the operations of the organization (Wikipedia Quango 2006). English Heritage operates with a considerable degree of power and access to public money derived from taxation and is controlled to a greater or lesser extent by Ministers of Parliament (Wikipedia English Heritage 2006). The present heritage system has been evolving for more than a century, gradually building a comprehensive framework of implementing protective legislative measures for the historic environment. These include "archaeological sites and monuments, historic buildings and areas, historic parks and gardens, battlefields and marine archaeology" (Department for Culture 2003 p. 1). English Heritage works with DCMS, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) and the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) to provide an integrated, unified designation and regulatory system for the historic environment (Department for Culture 2003 p. 2). Since it took the system more than a century to evolve, and many of the reformations have yet to be implemented, we can see that the process of change will be a slow one. What is heartening, however, is the fact that some of the proposed changes that have been implemented have created an atmosphere that is more conducive to frank discussions and to educating the public as to the whys and wherefores of the listing system. Although the present designation system has worked well protecting England's historic resources over the past hundred years, the current designation system is perceived by many as an obstruction to the understanding, effective management and appropriate development of historic sites. "The number of separate designation systems, and the different basis on which designation decisions are made, makes the system difficult to understand, particularly for non-professionals" (Institute of Historic Building Conservation 2005). Some historically selected sites are subject to multiple designations. It is possible for the title-holders to have property categorised as several different types of historic assets thus listed under several various designations. This dilemma has certainly been perplexing and exasperating for both owners and the heritage protection staff who administer the classifications, especially given the numerous regulatory regimes attached to diverse designations. "The designation process itself is perceived by many to be opaque and secretive, with little opportunity for dialogue with owners or for wide consultation." "The wording of designation documentation is seen as academic and hard to understand and there is a lack of user-friendly access to information on what is designated" (Institute of Historic Building Conservation 2005). The designation process is usually a slow, tedious procedure, with the average process time taking quite a while. "The average time taken to process a listing application is six months, with wide variance in response times. Urgent cases can be turned around in a matter of days, whereas very complex cases can take years. Similarly, the time taken to schedule an ancient monument can vary from weeks to years" (Institute of Historic Building Conservation 2005). No one argues that some designation decisions need to be taken more quickly than others but organizational impediments are a considerable source of frustration to both applicants/owners and system administrators. Since the organization also administers much of the money needed to repair and maintain the historic sites it should take into consideration the fact that these applicants and owners are part of the process. The organization has as part of its duties to educate the public. The owners and applicants are part of the public that need to be educated. Supplying that education would help in the process. Reforms of the heritage listing and consent system should always assure that current levels of protection for historic assets are maintained along with educating the public as to the whys and wherefores of the need to do so. Reform the List of Historic Sites and Buildings of England "The Government considers that the current criteria are broad and unclear and that the practice used by English Heritage when assessing buildings for listing needs to be clarified" (Lammy 2005). Bringing together the different regimes for protecting the historic environment and creating a single national list of historic sites and buildings of England would be a major contribution to a more comprehensive inventory of the historic environment of England. A centralised list compiled by English Heritage with a local sector compiled by local authorities all who are working within nationally agreed and openly published criteria and procedures would offer a much needed integrated basis for managing the historic environment (Department of Culture 2003 p. 3). English Heritage could be accountable for maintaining the List subject to a few caveats. English Heritage would act in an open manner regarding public policy and readily available Government listing policies and criteria. There would be continued authority for the Secretary of State to review exceptional cases and a requirement for English Heritage to give an annual account to the Secretary of State of its stewardship of the List. In addition, the legislated right of appeal for owners and applicants should be inherently adopted (Department of Culture 2003). English Heritage should construct an easily accessible appeals process regarding listing decisions. This would improve transparency to the listing system. "The grounds of appeal should, however, be limited to challenging whether English Heritage had reached its decision through correctly applying the statutory process and criteria and any published policy guidance, and the right of appeal limited to owners and local planning authorities" (Department of Culture 2003 p. 7). English Heritage should move to ensure listings are made transparent and easily accessible to the public. Entries should have all pertinent information regarding historical properties such as maps showing precisely where a structure is in an area. In addition, the List should include a 'statement of significance.' This would state what the particular significance about property and the reasoning behind a listing. It would also outline English Heritage procedure for which consent would be needed. List reform should also "provide a statement of reasons for each decision not to list. Require owners, local authorities, amenity societies, parish councils and the public to be informed and consulted when a proposal is made to place an asset on the List and provide protection during the consideration of listing as if the asset were already listed" (Department of Culture 2003). With the implementation of the many reforms proposed in 2004 and the ongoing implementation of continued input from private individuals, organizations and the public at large much of the complaints and criticisms previously espoused by those groups are being addressed by English Heritage. Simon Thurley, Chief Executive of English Heritage said: "English Heritage welcome's the government's decision to implement major reform of the heritage protection system.the reforms will create a modern, positive and comprehensive framework for the management of the historic environment" (Looking 2004). To sustain a more open system and to achieve the goals to alleviate listing concerns, Listing inspectors should involve themselves in extensive consultation and cooperation with owners and parties of interest. It is not widely recommended, though, that third party concerns be evaluated as this would place too much strain on an already overburdened system (Department of Culture 2003 p. 7). "The designation process itself is perceived by many to be opaque and secretive, with little opportunity for dialogue with owners or for wide consultation. The wording of designation documentation is seen as academic and hard to understand and there is a lack of user-friendly access to information on what is designated" (Department of Culture 2005 p. 2). Appraisal of HPS To many people, the English Heritage appears as simply an arm of the government, an environment/architectural type agency. Taking custodianship for posterity sake as well as for today is what English Heritage wants to project but how successful it is in conveying the long view in terms of conservation, long-term costs and overall feasibility beyond their immediate goals of preservation is of concern. Perception of English Heritage's objectives is undermined because its perceived lack of understanding in the managing of a sustainable historic environments future is at times questioned. In the past few years, the English Heritage has continued advancements and work in historic environment and an overall broader policy objective. This has re-enforced the Government's stance on sustainable development and has served as some justification for the English Heritage. While no one doubts English Heritage's very important tactical contributions to UK's heritage, it should be recognized that in the crucial analysis, the question is not whether the English Heritage is relevant, but what kind of involvement is needed from English Heritage. "How can it contribute most effectively to tackling its tasks in conjunction with the ways they are addressed by different parts of the historic environment sectors How should responsibility to tackle them be shared by government, business, professions, voluntary groups and communities as a whole What role does English Heritage have in defining such responsibilities" (Council for British Archaeology 2002). Developments of HPS Since April, 2005, English Heritage has been responsible for the administration of the listing system. By updating and expanding the listings, English Heritage has been attempting to make the heritage protection system simpler, more transparent and easier for the public to use. "English Heritage protection and planning are undergoing a cultural change to bring about greater openness, fairness, flexibility and accountability" (Lammy 2005). New information packs for owners and new notification procedures for owners and local authorities are being introduced in 2005/2006 as well as clearer and more expansive property records in list entries. English Heritage introduced an official consultation phase to the listing process allowing owners as well as local authorities the chance to comment on English Heritage's suggestion to the Secretary of State before it is put forward. The new information packs provide owners with information about the administrative process of having a property listed and instructs them to further resources of guidance in the matter. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport held a public discussion on the ideology of assessing buildings for listing last year. "These changes are the first stage of the Government's wider proposals for reform of the heritage protection system. More information on these reforms can be found in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport's Decision Report published in June 2004. The proposed revisions will not change the type of building that are listed or increase or reduce their overall number or change the level of protection afforded to historic buildings" (Lammy 2005). English Heritage, since taking sole control of the protection list, has made great technological strides by publishing (on its website) an inventory of archaeological sites and historic buildings in England online using PastScape Human Computer Interface. This impressive and user friendly interactive guide leads the user to English historical structures by a myriad of methods. "The four-year research behind English Heritage's PastScape project has examined many of the issues associated with Human Computer Interface (HCI) and Virtual Reality (VR)" (Pringle 2001). PastScape takes its information from the National Monuments Record (NMR's). This national historic environment database includes approximately 400,000 records on the archaeology and buildings of England and its territorial waters. "These records contain descriptions of any interesting archaeological details, picture and links to maps and aerial photographs on other websites. This online resource from English Heritage's NMR provides an easy-to-use way to find information about many of England's ancient and historical sites, buildings and monuments" (PastScape 2006). In reaction to an evolving Internet and the innovative technologies it offers, the English Heritage re-evaluated and significantly updated its approach to the quantity of data management and quality of information accessibility. English Heritage is increasingly becoming more proficient with making data more widely available, convenient and usable. "As an indirect consequence of new government initiatives (Modernising Government), English Heritage is making concerted efforts to make more of its own archival material available to much wider audiences than previously" (Barrett & Maglio 1998). PastScape is just one of the interactive additions to the new and improved English Heritage. Also included on the English Heritage website are Images of England, Viewfinder, Geophysical Survey Database, Heirport, The Environmental Archaeology Bibliography and the Archaeology Data Service. Images of England is a groundbreaking initiative which creates a digitised photographic record of England's 500,000 listed buildings. This information is made freely accessible to the public by the Images of England section of PastScape. Viewfinder is a picture library of historic images from the NMR archive that individuals can browse through at any time. "The Picture Gallery and Stories contain illustrations of the industrial age, social history, architecture and archaeology, dating from the 1840s to the present day" (Online Resources 2006). The Geophysical Survey Database provides an on-line catalogue of the archaeological geophysical surveys by the Archaeometry Branch of the Ancient Monuments Laboratory. Heirport is described as a portal for Historic Environment Information Resources. It allows cross-referencing of a wide range of databases. "It contains recent news stories about the historic environment and links to educational resources and community spaces where issues are discussed and debated" (Online Resources 2006). The Environmental Archaeology Bibliography (EAB) is a compilation of bibliographic references to published reports on environmental archaeology from the whole of the British Isles (Online Resources 2006). Archeological Data Search is a map search that allows the user to search a specific geographic area. What we can tell then is that English Heritage is attempting to keep up with the technological advances and is using those advances to further education efforts as well as fundraising efforts to generate additional revenues. This site also fits well within English Heritage's vision for open access to information resources regarding historic environment. It is based on the situation in the United Kingdom and on experience gained by the Archaeology Data Service. It is hoped that this experience will appeal to a larger audience. The value of access to cross-cultural resources will depend upon a shared approach. "There is a large number of Historic Environment Information Resources (HEIRs) with little co-ordination. There is considerable overlap and duplication between HEIRs; there is also no 'one-stop-shop' for the user. Creating a single integrated system is not an option. This was proposed for a time in the 1960's and 70's as archaeologists began to harness information technology, but it was rapidly realised that it could not be accomplished as it was neither politically acceptable, theoretically desirable, nor practically possible" (Richards 2000). Conclusion The British historic environment is something in which all citizens identify with and take pride. It is our inheritance which we want to hand down to future generations. This present-day society has made great strides in protecting our heritage therefore enhancing the perception of historic monuments. This enhancement is important as future citizens will make choices that differ from ours. What we hope is that they keep the same principles in mind as we do. After all, ideologies change but monuments do not. Quoting Simon Thurley once again, he states "We are confident we shall rise to the challenges they (the reformation programs) bring and are committed to working with all our partners to ensure that the transition to the new arrangements over the next few years is delivered efficiently and effectively" (Looking 2004). English Heritage is to, in conjunction with the government, defend the historic environment. Reforms to the system should make it easier for public access and understanding, rather than adding complications. It seems as if English Heritage has enhanced data collection and moved to a more transparent system which are vital steps toward a comprehensive knowledge base and therefore, greater understanding of our non-renewable heritage. The better we, and future generations, understand the historic environment, the better we can protect it. The level importance we put in our legacies and the steps we take to preserve it will determine how future generations view it and the steps they will take to enhance our preservation attempts. We cannot afford to view English Heritage as just another impersonal arm of government bureaucracy. It aids the link to our past, not just for us but for our families and offspring for thousands of years into the future. It is much of what identifies us and will define them as British. It is part of us and will be part of them. History belongs to the ages, the past as well as the future but for this to be, it must be protected in the present. It has been said that if we don't learn from past mistakes we are doomed to repeat them. In Britain, we have a glorious history with structures to illustrate it. We look upon these monuments as a living history and not just some artifacts to take pictures of, and then relegate to the past. If we do not protect these reminders of Britain's past, history will likely fade in our collective minds and we will be more likely to forget it, thus we are more susceptible to repeating past mistakes. English Heritage is indeed not just a romantic concept but are the guardians of our most sacred trusts. How we accept and deliver on this trust is a responsibility of epic proportions and importance. How we act will determine how future generations act in the preservation of our legacies and to responsibly answer the call of protection is the best way to repay past generations for the gift of our British identity. English Heritage is a major part of the protection of our heritage. Still in its infancy, it has, by and large, performed well in its duties and has positioned itself for positive future growth. Ironic as it may seem, the use of high technology by English Heritage will serve to aid a streamlined, efficient and more effective method of protecting the ancient treasures. References "17.5 Million for Historic Places" (2006) English Heritage. Retrieved 12 April 2006 from http://www.english-heritage.org.uk "About Listed Buildings." (2006). Pavilions of Splendor Architectural Heritage. Retrieved 22 February 2006 from http://www.heritage.co.uk/apavilions/glstb.html Barrett, R. & Maglio, P. P. (1998). "Informative Things: How to Attach Information to the Real World." Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. pp. 81-88. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from http://www.chart.ac.uk/chart2000/papers/noframes/barrett.html#1 Council for British Archaeology. (January 2002). "English Heritage Quinquennial Review." Department for Culture, Media and Sport. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from http://www.britarch.ac.uk/conserve/ehqreview.html Department for Culture, Media and Sport. (July 2003). "Protecting Our Historic Environment: Making the System Work Better." Architecture and Historic Environment Division. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from http://www.culture.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/9F3B74BE-B01F-431E-BBB6-4FC4372A0E52/0/ReviewHPR.pdf Department for Culture, Media and Sport (July 2004). "Review of Heritage Protection: The Way Forward." Heritage Protection Report, Retrieved 22 April 2006 from http://www.culture.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/FCA97675-DA33-4083-9724-49432CF9FE07/0/reviewofheritageprotection.pdf Department for Culture, Media and Sport. (August 2005). "Reforming Heritage Designations." Heritage Protection Report. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from < http://www.heritagelink.org.uk/docs/HPR_update_designation.doc> Institute of Historic Building Conservation. (August 2005). "Reforming the Heritage Consent Regimes." Heritage Protection Review. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from http://www.ihbc.org.uk/Local_gov/papers/HPRupdate_consents%5B1%5D.pdf Lammy, David. (25 July 2005). "Have Your Say on Listing Buildings Criteria." Tottenham. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from http://www.davidlammy.co.uk/da/20634 Looking Forward to the Past, (2004). English Heritage, Retrieved 21 April 2006 from: http://www.culture.gov.uk/cgi-bin/MsmGo.exegrab_id=347&page_id=14159104&query=dcms2004docreformingenglishheritage&hiword=2004+dcms+DCMSS+doc+english+ENGLISHMAN+REFORM+REFORMED+REFORMER+reforming+REFORMS+HERITAG+heritage+HERITAGES "Online Resources." (2006). English Heritage. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from < http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/> "PastScape." (2006). English Heritage. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from http://www.pastscape.org/homepage/index.htm Pringle, M. J. (2001). "Using Virtual Reality to Improve Public Access to Heritage Databases over the Internet." In: Stancic, Z. & Veljanovski, T. (Eds.), CAA2000 - Computing Archaeology for Understanding the Past, British Archaeological Reports International Series. (Forthcoming) Retrieved 23 February 2006 from http://www.chart.ac.uk/chart2000/papers/noframes/pringle.html#1 Richards, J.D. (2000). "Digital Data: Preservation and Re-Use." Archaeology Data Service. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from http://www.csanet.org/saa/saa-ads.html "Who are We" (2005) English Heritage. Retrieved April 12, 2006 from http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1665). Wikipedia contributors. (2006). "English Heritage." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from Wikipedia contributors. (2006). "Quasi-Autonomous Non-Governmental Organisation." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 23 February 2006 from < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quango> Read More