11th June 2005, 11:46 AM
Strangely.... As a Buildings Archaeologist (a real one !) I have seen buildings be ignored as part of our Heritage for years now... even now as a DC archaeologist it can be difficult to explain to a planner that buildings are archaeology sticking a bit out the ground... If you found a 17th century mansion on an excavation it would be recorded... same for one that is still standing. However.. it seems that the Buildings bandwagon has now well and truely been jumped on... ... hmmmmmmmm buildings... public see buildings..... money make from buildings we can... (as YODA - a lost accronym for English Heritage Working Group would say)
The hope is for a balance... and guidance is fine... policy documents are fine.. but they have to be enacted and used, understood and sensible. A Unified approach to Heritage... with subsections on Built Heritage, Standing Monuments, Sub Surface Monuments, Find Spots and Scatters would attach equal importance to each - as it is a bit of a judgment call to decide which is more important than the other.
Policy could be based on criteria that is cross relatable.. very much like the dreaded Statement of Cultural Significance formula!
Another day another WSI?
The hope is for a balance... and guidance is fine... policy documents are fine.. but they have to be enacted and used, understood and sensible. A Unified approach to Heritage... with subsections on Built Heritage, Standing Monuments, Sub Surface Monuments, Find Spots and Scatters would attach equal importance to each - as it is a bit of a judgment call to decide which is more important than the other.
Policy could be based on criteria that is cross relatable.. very much like the dreaded Statement of Cultural Significance formula!
Another day another WSI?