+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: volume (/showthread.php?tid=2030)
volume - Troll - 15th October 2005
Can someone please tell me where I can find some data?
I want to know how many sites have been excavated since the introduction of PPG15/16.I want to know how many sites are dug-on average, a year.
Many thanks. Luv you lots.Kissy Kissy.
volume - Cautionary Tale - 15th October 2005
Might be possible to come from this from the angle of number of sites successfully submitted to the NMR year on year. This would also indicate the ability of commercial units to actually see projects through to their actual conclusion. Not that I'm pesimistic about things
volume - voice of reason - 15th October 2005
Your best bet would be the Archaeological Investigations Project (AIP), run out of Bournemouth Uni, although by necessity it has to be a year or so behind to gather the data.
Normally you can get to it via the Archaeology Data Service website but it seems to be having some 'tecnical' problems at the moment - ie some bright spark has decided to update the operation without making sure it works properly and thereby preventing easy access!
volume - troll - 15th October 2005
Thankyou, yes am aware of the AIP endeavour and do have a few old copies.One of the problems they apparently encountered was that some units wer`nt too forthcoming with the info.Anyhoo, not givin in cos I hope to use the data to illustrate a point.....
volume - EarlySlav - 17th October 2005
That was one of the things that was done right in Ireland. A year book was printed with a brief summery of all excavations carried outand by what company etc.
volume - troll - 17th October 2005
Hi Slav. Sounds good, also sound very similar to the concept of the Bournemouth AIP.For clarity, here`s why I`m after the data....
On other threads, over many months, the view that commercialism and the lack of policed standards impedes the standards of archaeological endeavour, has been a recurring theme. I`m trying to understand the scale of commercial archaeological endeavour since the introduction of ppg15/16. For example, if someone told you that 50,000 archaeological sites had been subjected to competetive tendering and it`s inevitable ills, the scale of the issue would become apparent very quickly.Conversely, if (ridiculous I know) only a couple of hundred sites had been victim to the current system-well, thats a little different. What do you think? Am I barking up the wrong tree or, simply barking?
