their dual role—the advancement of archaeological research through the publication of the work of British and Scandinavian antiquaries and the advocacy of conservation—will be addressed. These were linked by promoting the reliability of archaeological knowledge and the understanding of their unique nature as a source of information about human prehistory.

No full-scale study of the BAA has been written (but see Chapman 1989b). The RAI has fared rather better (see Millett’s entry in this encyclopedia). The BAA was formed in 1844, with a membership largely drawn from the Society of Antiquaries of London. The BAA prospectus clearly outlined the connections to that more “senior” society and hinted at the reasons for a separate foundation: “The object of this Association is to investigate, preserve, and illustrate all ancient Monuments of the History, Manners, Customs, and Arts of our forefathers, and in furtherance of the principles with which the Society of Antiquaries of London was established, to render available the researches of a numerous class of lovers of Antiquity, who are unconnected with that institution.”

The “Introduction” to the first volume of the Archaeological Journal (in 1845) stressed the need to encourage intelligent research into British antiquities and vigilant care for their preservation. The two objectives were seen to be complementary. The author, the antiquary Albert Way (1805–1874), reiterated the basic principle, enshrined in the Society of Antiquaries, that ancient memorials of an important national character were not solely confined to those of the classical world. Way made an explicit appeal to the potential “scientificness” of archaeology through a comparison with geology, a discipline that he considered a science because it turned the incomprehensible into fact. In his view archaeology could, in the light of the three-age system, do likewise. The plea to science was also important from the perspective of conservation. Way clearly believed that the new science of archaeology could imbue the monuments with rationally assessable meaning and value, and the BAA was to capitalize on this prospect by coordinating attempts to preserve them.

Way was also quite explicit about the reasons for establishing a group separate from the Society of Antiquaries. The first reason was that the society’s charter did not make specific reference to concerted attempts at preservation. The second was that the society was based in London, thereby denying most of the provincial middle class the opportunity to attend its meetings. The BAA was promoted as the group that would fill these gaps and more effectively respond to the advancement of extended interest in Archaic researches. The anonymous review of Worsaae’s Denmark’s Olden Times (1844), which appeared in the second volume of the Archaeological Journal (Anonymous 1846), summed up the association’s view of how prehistoric archaeology should be written if it were to assist in the preservation of monuments. The reviewer noted government support for the Danish National Museum. He further observed that a firm case had been made for the national and historical importance of archaeological data by means of Worsaae’s account of climatic and ecological change, the archaeological data themselves, and the use of ethnographic analogy in their interpretation. Significantly, the reviewer also made an explicit appeal to the racial aspects of Worsaae’s prehistory, emphasizing that the English would also see value in the work because it added to the history of the German race. Finally, the reviewer, unlike most others, stressed the significance of the third section of Worsaae’s work, in which the author had considered the meaning and value of the archaeological resources and argued for strong links between formal professional notions of value and popularly accepted justifications for their preservation.

The interests of the RAI, which had by this time split from the BAA, and the establishment of a language and a purpose for the discipline of archaeology developed right through the period prior to the discoveries made by john evans and hugh falconer at brixham cave. J.M. K.’s “Introduction” to the sixth volume of the Archaeological Journal (1849) stressed that archaeologists were collectors with a definite purpose and method: “The higher purpose at which we ought to strive is the record of human development—the History of Man imagined in the History of one collection of men” (1849, 3).