Current Research in Egyptology 2005: Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Symposium

Bringing Egypt out of Academia: Outreach and Inclusion in the Petrie Museum

Y. E. Balbaligo

Introduction

The Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology at University College London (UCL) is a distinguished collection of Egyptian artefacts created through the bequest of the writer Amelia Edwards and named after W. M. F. Petrie, the prolific archaeologist and first professor of Egyptology in England. Since the museum was established in 1892, the role of the museum, and of museums in general, has changed. Museums are no longer seen as solely guardians or keepers of collections. Museums now make artefacts accessible to people and enable them to explore collections for inspiration, learning and enjoyment (definition from the Museums Association 1998). Museums are also tied to the cultural and social values of their times and there is now an emphasis on making museums inclusive institutions that are accessible to a diverse body of people. This paper will focus on the Petrie Museum and discuss the current initiatives to target diverse audiences beyond the students the collection was originally intended for, and how they are making the past accessible to new audiences and why. By discussing the current outreach initiatives, it is hoped that they will illuminate the relationship between how contemporary social agendas affect museums and how this can potentially have an impact on the development of Egyptology. These issues will be framed within debates in museology and public archaeology, in order to bring these two complementary disciplines to Egyptological audiences and show how this existing body of literature can contribute to the debates within Egyptology about who the past is for and how we, as a discipline, interpret and present the past. The ultimate aim of this paper is to share good practice and highlight the strengths of the Petrie Museum.

The Petrie Museum and its social context

It is acknowledged that museums are a significant and powerful vehicle for the public construction of the past and for public involvement in archaeology (Merriman 2004b, 85). Archaeology, however, is inescapably highly politicised. It is embroiled in social and cultural debates about the past and its meaning for the present, and has significance beyond the accumulation of abstract knowledge about the past (Smith 2004, 1). As cultural houses for archaeological objects, museums are ultimately about the development of cultural identities as well as notions of citizenship, and these are all inextricably bound with politics. In 1997, the new Labour government saw a shared culture as a vehicle for increasing social cohesion through individual self-fulfilment, awareness of citizenship and communal participation. Thus, ideas of social inclusion are enshrined in governmental policy by the Department for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Social Exclusion Unit (formerly in the Cabinet Office and now in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister), in an attempt to enhance the cultural life of Britain and to make British society inclusive to all people. Museums therefore have the potential to be agents of social change where museums are often the focal point for cultural activity in the community, interpreting its history and heritage. This gives people a sense of their own identity, and that of their community (DCMS 2000, 3; see also 1999; 2001; Dodd and Sandell 2001). The emphasis on dismantling barriers to accessing museums and on providing services for a much broader range of people has the potential to contribute to greater social equality. While the concept of social inclusion has become embedded throughout central government policy, critics have argued that the assignment of social goals to cultural organisations is tying them too closely to the state and eroding their autonomy and reducing the arts to a tool for governmental control (Sandell 2002, 18). However, museums and galleries have the potential to contribute towards the combating of inequality and they do have a responsibility to do so. This requires museums to become responsive, not to short-term, party political objectives but rather to longer-term paradigmatic shifts in thinking, whilst being contemporary and also understanding their position in their own social structure. The Petrie Museum is a Designated museum with an outstanding collection and receives significant funding from DCMS. As well as serving its primary users –the staff and students at UCL–it must also demonstrate its worth to a wider audience who will benefit from the collection. While it is accountable to external funding bodies, the Petrie is also bound to its parent institution, UCL.

The university context of the Petrie Museum

As a university museum, the Petrie receives most of its funding from UCL and was founded with the same libertarian ethos. The university is also home to four publicly accessible museums, of which the Petrie is one, and twelve departmental collections, unified under the name ‘UCL Museums and Collections’. These museums and collections cover a diverse array of subjects from science and archaeology, to geology, natural history and art, and were gathered and developed from the 1820s to assist UCL’s academic staff in their teaching and research. Previously all collections existed separately, however in 1998 UCL invested further resources into the care and management of the collections and for the first time centralised its management systems. All of the museums and collections work towards collective goals and this can be seen in the UCL Museums and Collections mission statement of the 5 Year Strategic Plan 2004–2009, a document which provides a focus for shared common objectives and to give the museums a framework within which to work and measure success (see Ambrose and Runyard 1991; Davis 1996). The mission statement is to inspire learning, support research and stimulate enjoyment for the benefit of UCL and the wider community, based on the sustainable use of the collections (UCL Museums and Collections 2004, 1; cf. previous mission statement in MacDonald 2000, 68). This statement mirrors the current definition of what a museum is and it defines who its users are. One of the ways in which to ensure sustainable use of the collections is in the audience it attracts. Although the priority audience is UCL’s staff and students, all the museums are expanding to serve the wider community and to be more accessible and inclusive. While all the museums target the same audiences, the Petrie’s audience base is more diverse. It is taking advantage of its special appeal to certain interest groups, as well as actively creating new audiences and targeting new communities so that the collections can continue to be appreciated and used.

A significant problem shared by all the museums is the low usage of the collections. Outside of the Egyptological community, too few people are aware of the Petrie’s collection. Even within UCL, many students are surprised to learn that UCL has four museums and even more collections. Thus, they are under-utilised and under-appreciated. The total direct users (as opposed to virtual users) is estimated at 17,000 per year (UCL Museums and Collections 2004, 1). This is a common problem faced by university museums and a problem also faced by the Oriental Museum at the University of Durham, which houses an Egyptian collection (Karen Exell, personal communication). Low usage of the collections is also closely connected to physical access and the visibility of the museums. All of the UCL museums are located within the main UCL campus and its opening hours are constrained by staffing levels. Access to the Petrie is further restricted as it does not have an easily accessible public entrance (see MacDonald 2000, 67). Other problems faced by the Petrie include insufficient funding–a perennial issue for all museums, especially university museums (MacDonald 2000, 68)–as well as limited accommodation and space for the collection. Accommodation has long been an issue, as its present location was supposed to be temporary. Of the 80,000 objects in the collection, 6% are on display, and the Petrie is currently housed above UCL’s main boiler where building work is frequently carried out. In the past, air conditioning and the roof and drainage system have caused irreversible damage to part of the collection. Low lighting and the labelling of the objects have also been areas of dissatisfaction for visitors, as a degree of specialist knowledge is required to understand the context of the objects. These are problems with its present location, however the relocation of the Petrie to a purpose-built museum would eradicate these problems and this is discussed below.

The Petrie Museum is attached to the Institute of Archaeology at UCL, where undergraduate and postgraduate students use the collection for courses in the archaeology of Egypt and Sudan, museum and artefact studies and conservation. Furthermore, the Petrie is closely linked to the postgraduate courses the Institute offers in Museum Studies, Public Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Studies, and is thus uniquely placed to benefit from research conducted in these areas. Although the Petrie is primarily a teaching collection, it nevertheless remains little known and almost underused by Institute of Archaeology staff teaching courses (MacDonald and Shaw 2004, 112); there is, however, potential for cross-disciplinary usage. As well as being linked through teaching, many of the initiatives at the Institute tie in with initiatives at the Petrie. One of the current activities is the attempt to diversify archaeology. The driver for this initiative is the Race Relations Amendment Act (2000), where it is the duty of universities to make race equality central to the way public authorities work. In 2001, UCL agreed to Corporate Equality Objectives which apply cultural diversity, and UCL has produced a Race Equality Action Plan for 2002–2006, which covers equality issues in the management of college. The Institute has agreed a Strategic Plan (2004–2006) which acknowledges some of the difficulties involved in recruiting a diverse staff and student body. At the time of writing, the Institute of Archaeology is in the process of establishing a Diversity Working Group which will report directly to the Institute’s Policy Group to evaluate the way it recruits staff and students and structures courses. Archaeology as a subject does not have a strong record of ethnic minority staff recruitment and this goes back to very low levels of ethnic minority student recruitment. Furthermore, the curriculum at the Institute has been viewed as rather traditional and Eurocentric, reflecting archaeology’s long preoccupation with area studies and great civilisations, rather than, for example, themes of potential topical interest (MacDonald 2004). This focus on diversity is also reflected in wider archaeological thought as seen in the strategic aims of DCMS (outlined above), the Council for British Archaeology and English Heritage, amongst others. In the long term, the outcomes of the diversity initiative at the Institute have the potential to impact upon visitor numbers and further use of the Petrie.

The role of outreach

The two main priorities for the UCL Museums and Collections are to increase the use of the collections for teaching, learning and research, and to increase the access and use of the collections for widening participation and wider public audiences (UCL Museums and Collections 2004, 2–8). UCL’s Widening Participation Unit plays a similar role where the aims are to raise awareness of higher education among under-represented groups, to increase the number of students from under-represented groups attending programmes at UCL and to maintain and increase the progression and retention rates of under-represented groups at UCL (Widening Participation website). For the Petrie Museum, the UCL community who usually use the collections consists of undergraduate and postgraduate students of the Institute of Archaeology, as well as Continuing Education colleges and other lifelong learners. Increasing the numbers of users can be achieved by diversifying who the users are, and this is currently done with an Education and Access Officer through educational channels; two outreach workers who work with Egyptian and Sudanese communities and African and African Caribbean communities and supplementary schools; and a virtual outreach curator.

Outreach has become fundamental to the process of changing the role of museums within their communities and establishing relationships with new audiences. It has become a means of introducing museum subjects and collections to audiences that have tended to be excluded from museums and galleries by a variety of barriers (Martin 1996, 38). Museums now no longer need to be conceived of as a building to which visitors are enticed, but as a service which tailors its work to different target audiences. As a result, outreach work has become an important means of service delivery–both as an end in itself and as a way in which the museum can publicise itself (Merriman 2004b, 95). By using outreach workers, the Petrie makes its collection accessible to communities outside of the confines of the university and traditional Egyptology audiences, by taking knowledge and objects out of the museum to other communities. Here, museum objects, through loan boxes and portable exhibitions, are a starting point for activities and workshops. Outreach workers also bring groups in to the museum to contextualise what has been learnt, introduce them to the displays and the university environment, and utilise the Petrie as meeting place for further discussions. This has strengthened the connections between the museum collection and local communities and has extended the educational role of the museum, as well as increasing the numbers of visitors.

At present it is difficult to measure the impact of outreach work and its social value (for example see Scott 2002), as its effects are not immediately evident. It has the potential, however, to have long-term benefits for individuals and the museum itself. It provides a service to people who do not usually go to museums and it has increased the local and cultural relevance of museums to the communities they are serving. Outreach work is raising the profile of the Petrie and demonstrating the value of the museum and its services to the university and other funding bodies. For individuals, it is acknowledged that museums can have an impact with wide-ranging outcomes: from the personal and psychological, such as self-esteem or sense of place, to the pragmatic, such as the acquisition of skills to enhance employment opportunities (Sandell 2002, 5). Outreach at the Petrie can further personal development by introducing people to the culture of ancient Egypt and Sudan, and tied in with UCL Widening Participation initiatives, introduce young people to a university environment.

Although there is no guarantee that new audiences, particularly the ‘socially excluded’ who would not normally consider visiting museums, are reached (Merriman 2004b, 96), the Petrie are targeting specific groups to ensure that outreach workers are made the most of. In 2000, the Petrie commissioned research into understanding attitudes of existing users such as academics and amateur enthusiasts, and non-users, from modern black and Egyptian communities in London as well as children (MacDonald 2000; MacDonald 2003; MacDonald and Shaw 2004). It is the first time that the Petrie has asked these communities for their opinions and the findings of this study are a basis for audience development and communication, as well as the current initiatives that are in place.

Museums visits have always had a place in mainstream education. However, outreach with schools expands the educational role of the museum through better interaction with objects to understand the past (see Stone and Molyneaux 1994; Stone and MacKenzie 1994; Hooper-Greenhill 1999). The Education and Access Officer is responsible for promoting UCL Museums and Collections to schools, families and life-long learners. This role has involved developing partnerships with primary and secondary schools in London boroughs. The services and programs offered vary from museum visits, to handling sessions with objects in classrooms, an after schools group and enrichment clubs, as well as teachers’ packs and digital resources. Outreach work in schools is largely responsive, where primary and secondary schools call the Petrie and request talks, outreach sessions or visits. The activities are tied in with certain Key Stages in the English National Curriculum. At Key Stage 2 (for 7 to 11 year olds), there is an option in History to focus on ancient Egypt, which encourages the study of aspects of everyday life through archaeological evidence (MacDonald 2000, 79; MacDonald and Shaw 2004, 114). The Education and Access Officer also recruits student volunteers at UCL and gives training to enable them to take loan boxes out to schools to run outreach sessions.

Archaeology summer schools are also organised, where Camden Council have targeted hard-to-reach groups. Past successful summer schools include: A Slice of Camden, which introduces primary school children from Camden in London to local history, heritage and archaeology through handling sessions and mock excavations; Mummified, which involved handling objects from the Petrie collection and visits to the Egyptian galleries in collaboration with the British Museum; and Splash, a summer school for teenagers on Marine archaeology, held at a diving school and the Institute of Archaeology. Pupils were given introductions to handling objects, principles of archaeology and wreck-diving, and a practical element of underwater archaeology in a swimming pool with mock-salvage exercises. Using the collections supports and enhances what pupils learn at school and introduces subjects they may not know about. It also introduces the concept of university in a very low-key way, to hopefully raise aspirations (Celine West, personal communication).

A loan box is another way that museums have attempted to widen hands-on access to objects, as well as breaking long-held taboos about being allowed to touch and handle objects (Merriman 2004b, 93). This method is also one of the oldest forms of museum outreach and a vital component of educational outreach (Merriman 2004b, 95; see also Hall and Swain 2000; Paris 2002). The Petrie loan box is used by outreach workers and there is also one available for teachers to borrow. The box has been adapted for Key Stage 2 and for themes in Islamic Civilisations for Key Stage 3 (for 11–14 year olds), to take Islamic and modern Egyptian perspectives into account. The box currently contains real Egyptian objects from the pharaonic, Coptic, Medieval and modern periods, as well as resource packs with activities suggestions. Objects in the box include a bronze figure of the goddess Bust out (c.525 B.C., unprovenanced–see Figure 1), a black steatite Coptic cross from Koptos, and modern rosary and prayer beads. With these particular objects, questions about different religions and beliefs, aspects of daily life and chronology can be explored, as well as identifying materials, manufacture, function and usage. This range of objects demonstrates evidence for the relationship between ancient and modern Egyptians, and the culture’s continuation and relevance. There are many benefits of using real objects in learning and working with audiences, especially the young. They provide a direct link with a topic or the past and can enhance young people’s interest in and understanding of a subject, while encouraging them to use all their senses–especially touch, sight and smell. They help to develop the important skill of drawing conclusions based on an examination of evidence, together with an understanding of the limitations and reliability of evidence. In schools, they are ideal for generating group and class discussion, all while promoting the value of museums and encouraging young people to visit museums with their families to further their learning, as well as for fun (from UCL Museums and Collections website). As the loan box is portable, object-centred learning is also used at public events which generally coincide with national events such as Black History Month, Family Learning Week, the Big Draw and National Archaeology Week. Furthermore, in presenting images of the objects, there is a movement to showing them being actively used and this can be seen in the Petrie’s updated information leaflet which also has a section in Arabic and shows the diversity of the Petrie’s users.

Figure 1. Outreach session with primary schools; learner looking at a statue of Bastet from the Petrie loan box, 2004 (photo: Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, University College London).

Reaching new communities

In 2002, two additional outreach workers were employed to work with Egyptian and Sudanese, and African and African Caribbean communities and supplementary schools. MacDonald (2000, 79) states that the decision to target people of Egyptian and African descent was made in recognition of the fact that the [Petrie] collection may have a special significance for people who see their roots in Egypt specifically or Africa generally. Many black people regard ancient Egypt as a culture that has been appropriated by Eurocentric archaeologists and historians. Some would say that an Egyptian museum such as the Petrie, with its roots in Western archaeological practice, has a duty to explore alternative views of its subject matter. These two outreach posts have been hugely successful and have transformed the services offered by the Petrie. The success in reaching communities is also due to the Petrie’s location and the ethnic diversity of London.

The Egyptian and Sudanese outreach worker Okasha El Daly has been establishing contact with a range of Egyptian and Sudanese communities in London, also in conjunction with the Egyptian Cultural Bureau in London. Historically, it is perceived that modern Egyptians have not been as engaged in the study of ancient Egypt as Western scholars, and that Medieval Arabs had no interest in ancient Egypt. Reid (1984, 233; see also Reid 2002) has stated that Islamic identity has tended to crowd out feelings of kinship or curiosity about ancient Egyptians and Western imperial domination set back the growth of indigenous Egyptology, which might otherwise have taken root fifty years before it did. However, El Daly (2005) has demonstrated that Medieval Arabs had a great appetite for historical research, where they learnt about the ancient culture through direct contact with Copts, and observed monuments and artefacts. Furthermore, some Arab scholars had access to ancient scripts and correctly deciphered aspects of demotic, hieratic and hieroglyphs. El Daly’s research is the bridge between Medieval Arabs and modern Arabs, showing them that their ancestors were interested in their past. It is also an invitation to modern Arabs to re-examine their relationship with their past, as presently, for Egyptians, it has been noted that there is a gap between modern Egypt and the past as it is seen as being for tourists (Hassan 1998; 2003; El Daly 2003). Before the research undertaken by the Petrie, El Daly states that no one had ever asked Arabs for their opinion (Okasha El Daly, personal communication).

Outreach activities have included setting up discussion groups and exhibitions, and giving lectures in Arabic to adult Arabic audiences including Iraqis, Syrians and Palestinians on aspects of these cultures, as well as lectures on ancient and Medieval Egypt. Furthermore, there is an emphasis on working with Arabic women, as women are not traditionally seen as being interested in archaeology. The same expertise in the Petrie has been used by the British Museum. Okasha El Daly was a consultant for the Sudan: Ancient Treasures exhibition (September 2004 –January 2005) where he translated the catalogue into Arabic. This was an important step in showing Sudanese people that an authoritative institution such as the British Museum was taking an interest in their culture. This will become more important as the exhibition is to go on tour, with the hope of attracting more Sudanese visitors.

As well as working with adults in the UK, Okasha El Daly has given lectures in Arabic and English in Egypt and he has worked with children from preparatory schools, using the outreach in the Petrie as a model. However, an infrastructure for outreach work does not exist in Egypt and they do not have the same access to loan boxes or teaching resources as exists in the UK. Outreach in Egyptian schools has been done with slides and replicas of objects, as it is prohibited to use authentic ancient Egyptian artefacts. The aims are to make modern young Egyptians identify with ancient Egyptians and show how they can be relevant to their lives, through themes such as tolerance with foreigners and migration, religious worship, and skills such as organisation and timekeeping. Conducting outreach with young Egyptians is a way of introducing sound knowledge from reliable sources, with the potential to train and recruit the future generation of Egyptian archaeologists. These types of activities need to be made sustainable in Egypt, but more pressingly, they need to be driven by the Egyptian government, education ministers and the media as a form of mass communication. This can only be done successfully if there is dialogue and cooperation between these institutions. While much more needs to be done, the work done so far has raised the profile of the Petrie Museum with the Egyptian and Sudanese communities in the UK and in Egypt.

The outreach work with African and African Caribbean communities and supplementary schools in London, carried out by Kenneth John, has focused on the Africanisation of Egyptology. The rationale for an African-centred Egyptology is that many people in the past were taught that Egypt was the only country in Africa that produced anything worthy of praise or emulation by the rest of the world. This resulted in a long-standing agreement between scholars, historians and politicians, to relocate Egypt, the agreed location being the Middle East. This sustained the belief that Egypt is not an African country and that its greatest achievements had very little to do with black Africans (Kenneth John, personal communication). While there is a long history of black scholarship on ancient Egypt and its relationship to the rest of Africa (for example Asante 1992; 1995; 2000; Celenko 1996; Mudimbe 1988), there is evidently a great and powerfully-felt need among African and African Caribbean people to reposition ancient Egypt within Africa. Furthermore, within Egyptology, there has been work towards relocating Egypt back into Africa (for example see O’Connor and Reid 2003). The work done by Kenneth John is rooted in communities, with people who