As Hi-Viz says.... reponses and answers to civil questions are better than clipped one liners.
Many of us do feel strongly about Thornbourgh. However - if there is any feeling that archaeolgists are not acting accordingly... then these allegations should be verified. If the methods of excavation/investigations are not carried out as per the guidelines (created by the IFA and available on the website in the standards and guidlines section -
http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/ic...hp?page=15)
The Site Diary was a brilliant (and brave) piece of openess... nobody could fault Mike Griffiths for allowing a transparent view of daily work on the site. (As a by product it was also a fascinating document regarding the daily life of diggers!)
To suggest that the Thornbourgh Henges are important and significant is something that we can all (well mostly) agree on. To hint at soome form of dodgy shenannigans and archaeolgists working to the detriment of archaeology is another.
To ask whether or not this is the case is valid and perhaps desrves an answer rather than an avoidance. just to clear the matter up once and for all.
as a foot note... Mike Griffiths has not answered a request to return here.
I took from his post that it was suggested that he and Neil Campling worked together prior to him becoming a contractor and Neil becoming the Curator (Mikes old job) where was this allegation?
I have also talked to Neil on a few occasions and know him as a curator who works hard for archaeology within the usual council framework.. cetainly in my opinion a man of integrity
Another day another WSI?
