8th June 2006, 11:02 PM
Quote:quote:Are you saying that the LBA site was preserved so that the gravel was not quarried? Or do you mean that resources were directed to the LBA site and the gravel left to the quarrying?
Wasn't a quarry site. The LBA site took precedence and was excavated, and the, in my opinion, long shot that there was anything in the gravel was abandoned by the curator. I think he was pleased that a speculative evaluation looking for Palaeolithic material panned out, just not in the period he was expecting. It is unclear whether potential Palaeolithic material was removed by the development, which was urban commercial. Maybe, maybe not.