6th July 2005, 10:39 AM
I overheard Phil Haaaarding in the pub, talking about what he did. He actually said that any archaeologist should be able to do what he did, and he mentioned the Steel City programme. I liked it because it showed something that they rarely cover, but that plenty of people are interested in. And it showed the developer bitching about how much it was costing him, and slagging off the archaeologists 'scratching about'. And the steel smelting went wrong...
I reckon there is a role for them using their 'brand name', and following other peoples digs. I've really had enough of the narrow questions/narrative driven three day site trashing. And waiting for them to publish something decent is like finding hens teeth.
I reckon a programme following a big pipeline or road job might be intersting, lots of periods, and a landscape level approach. Still plenty of potential for running about pointing at things.
On a devils advovate front, TT has imroved awareness of things like geophys, fieldwalking, map analysis, archive research, etc. Often these are much more interesting and informative than the actual excavation.
I reckon there is a role for them using their 'brand name', and following other peoples digs. I've really had enough of the narrow questions/narrative driven three day site trashing. And waiting for them to publish something decent is like finding hens teeth.
I reckon a programme following a big pipeline or road job might be intersting, lots of periods, and a landscape level approach. Still plenty of potential for running about pointing at things.
On a devils advovate front, TT has imroved awareness of things like geophys, fieldwalking, map analysis, archive research, etc. Often these are much more interesting and informative than the actual excavation.