Interesting question Troll.

Well for a start, it might put an end to that age old problem of standards and complaints. If you're not a member of the IFA and don't work for an RAO, then they have no authority to take you to task over the quality of your work (or employment practice). This in turn leads to all those accusations that the IFA turn a blind eye to bab practice and practitioners.

D. Vader
Senior Consultant

Vader Maull & Palpatine
Archaeological Consultants

We are the consultants you are looking for

Hi Barnsey

There's quite a number of ways to preserve 'setting'. For example, applications near a Scheduled Ancient Monument will always have setting taken into account. I assume this is true for some Listed Building consents, particularly those in Conservation Areas, where the character of the whole is maintained. If the site is a registered park & garden setting is important, and I suppose that in a round about way protected trees provide a character/setting to a landscape that can't be altered. In London views are protected (the Tower, St Paul's) which has an affect on the setting of new buildings - especially tall ones. I also imagine there a number of general planning considerations about appropriateness too.

So lots of ways to look after setting. More difficult would be arguing what makes a setting special in the first place.

cheers

ML

I remember the very conference sir! I heartily recommend that you write to Prospect and ask them why one should join them.They will send you a nice glossy leaflet outlining all they have done for us.Probably the most pathetic work of fiction I have ever seen and arguably, open to all sorts of litigation too. Unions see a large untapped subscription resource in the world of archaeology and that`s about it. I personally believe it`s high time we formed a lobby group that will aim to enlighten as many MPs as possible and push for reform.These people are elected to speak on our behalf-they dont ask for a subscription and, won`t attempt to sell you all sorts of other meaningless crap along the way either....not only that, our pantomime known as a democracy has all but annihalated any credibility unions once had.Thanx to Herr Thatcher and the new Bliar conservative party. Lobby groups-not unions.

I have just read in a Sunday paper (and this may be the beginning of an awful urban myth!!) that manual workers (such as archaeologists might well be classed) will be unable to take advantage of the government's proposed ID/biotechnics scheme because our fingerprints are 'too worn down' to register on the equipment.

Which made me think that inadvertently there are after all some advantages to being an archaeologist. Any other suggestions?

Quote:quote:Originally posted by troll

they won`t cry cos it does`nt sting.Johnsons lotion is quite good too.Alledgedly.Just a thought.Offered as a caring parent obviously.

well, it would be a start if we could get all members of our profession to view human remains as an important part of the record rather than as a category somewhere below bulk finds. We need someone with the time and funds to go and study a previously excavated collection of human remains that are sitting unstudied in some warehouse, to show what can be done with them. We need to inspire the heritage staff and public of the country in which the remains are being excavated to take control of the collections and who is allowed to conduct an excavation. I would suggest that as the EU expands, there should be some ethical and archaeological guidelines that cover excavations, not only of human remains, on a Europe wide basis. I think that if a lot of people in the countries where foreign-led excavations are taking place found out how they were undertaken and what happened to the collections, they would be deeply shocked and disgusted...

++ i spend my days rummaging around in dead people ++

What good will that do? Aren't wages for any job subject to the laws of supply and demand?

Today, Bradford. Tomorrow, well, Bradford probably.

As you know I don't like to quibble, but most archaeology degrees are of course BA's... but I do suspect that univeristies ain't what they used to be, to accommodate the lunatic and arbitrary decree that 50% of school leavers should go to uni. Why? Shouldn't it be that EVERYONE for whom a university course is appropriate should be able to go to uni, be it 1% or 90%? Should we not respect non-academic occupations for themselves just as much?

Training for what, Troll? Do you mean for commercial archaeology? As I have suggested elsewhere, should the industry not play some part in the training of its staff?

Today, Bradford. Tomorrow, well, Bradford probably.

Fantasy: every area has a well funded and well staffed museum which also maintains the SMR, archives and reports, and is the home of the county mounty and the county archaeological unit. SMR and inventories are publicly searchable.

England will win the World Cup next year, then retain the Ashes in Australia, and all the trains will run on time.

Today, Bradford. Tomorrow, well, Bradford probably.

and..
3. Public dissemination (good god i need a dictionary) - after all, we can change the pay and make the sites safe, but if no one apart from the Curator reads or indeed knows about the report whats it all for?