Bad for Archaeology - Good for Archaeologists - Discuss

[pdurdin]

In response to P Durdin, if you really reckon that a WB is going to pick up your archaeology when an eval has failed then I suspect you need to re-think your eval strategy. Or perhaps I'm missing a nuance here.

Maybe! I haven't posted on this topic.

[Sith]

That site wouldn't have been so difficult, but a consultant and a curator got in the way...

I can't speak with any authority about the methods of curators but it has always struck me that there are two types of consultants:

• those who 'manage' the archaeology for their client, and
  
• those who try to make it go away.
  

I'll leave it up to you to decided which group i belong to.

[Unitof1]

I've personally turned a WB into a 6-figure project before now, and plenty into 4 and 5 figure jobs, so why settle for a few hundred quid and walk away having ignored all the archaeology?

Thing is dino the curators would use this to say that wb works. I would like to know what kind of client would accept a contingency of a 6, 5 or 4 figure liability from a post determination few hundred quid watching brief condition or who would advise any developer to take such a risk. Had these been sites which had had evaluation or was the client some public service?

You might use a watching brief on a site that is protected (either through listing-scheduling or being managed by a heritage agency) when necessary remedial work has to be done ie replacing Victorian drains, puting in new fence
alignments etc. The damage is minimal but the hole gives you a key hole view into the underlying stratigraphy.

does it really wax. All that setting up a contract, lieasing with the contractors, standing around to get some utterly pointless going through the motion of recording a glimps of underlying stratigrafy which isnt going anywhere except to burden some archive. Whats the point of this information from the protected site. Lets say its a medieval listed building are you using this fact hopeing to find romans or how deep the foundations are?

[BAJR]

Thing is dino the curators would use this to say that wb works. I would like to know what kind of client would accept a contingency of a 6, 5 or 4 figure liability from a post determination few hundred quid watching brief condition or who would advise any developer to take such a risk. Had these been sites which had had evaluation or was the client some public service?

My thoughts as well...

I definitely need Dino's lawyers to be able to force that one through...

[Wax]

does it really wax. All that setting up a contract, lieasing with the contractors, standing around to get some utterly pointless going through the motion of recording a glimps of underlying stratigrafy which isnt going anywhere except to burden some archive. Whats the point of this information from the protected site. Lets say its a medieval listed building are you using this fact hopeing to find romans or how deep the foundations are?

Thing is when you are managing an historic property any evidence is useful even negative as it enables you to gradually build up a picture and give you ammunition when someone wants to do something more distructive. It is amazing the levels of impact that are permissible before you even get to having to apply for planning permission. Knowing how deep your foundations are or how they are constructed is actually rather important.

I really hate the fact that listed buildings often get all sorts of work carried out on them with due regard to the standing fabric and no regard to the underlying archaeology. Planning conditions focus on the listed status and forget what might be underneath them. Imagine what might be under the floor level in a Georgian Manor house built on the site of a Mediveal Hall.

[Dinosaur]

My thoughts as well...

I definitely need Dino's lawyers to be able to force that one through...

What kind of WB condition do your curators issue up there? [or down, in UO1's case] Normally (at least in the local universe) there's a clause indicating that should significant remains be found works will cease, lots of meetings/swearing/tearing out of hair etc, EH get dragged in, more meetings and then a PD/WSI gets formulated to deal with them. And then hopefully the client realises that trying to cut corners and getting in cheap contractors from outside the area to do the eval was all a horrible mistake...

Actually the big expensive one was an aggregate firm, no longer extant (not guilty, honest!), although lots of the cash ultimately came from the ASLF and other sources, continues to do so 14 years on actually, since people are still getting research grants to play with the stuff :face-approve:

[Dinosaur]

Planning conditions focus on the listed status and forget what might be underneath them. Imagine what might be under the floor level in a Georgian Manor house built on the site of a Mediveal Hall.

Did a job earlier this year which involved hand-digging a service trench up to the wall of a standing building, but didn't include digging down inside or through the wall - the huge potsherds in the stuff the builders were wheeling out (and a quick shufty with a torch at the in situ while they were on a tea-break and the H&S man wasn't about) did rather suggest we were excavating the wrong bit....

[P Prentice]

I can't speak with any authority about the methods of curators but it has always struck me that there are two types of consultants:

• those who 'manage' the archaeology for their client, and
  
• those who try to make it go away.
  

I'll leave it up to you to decided which group i belong to.

dosent sound like you Could Get More Satisfaction from your job sith