4th November 2006, 01:26 AM
In order to avoid waking up to an irate crowd waving AK47's, our practice (and I naively assumed it was standard elsewhere - shows how innocent I am) is to specify how anything brought out of the ground is treated in terms of stabilising, testing, evaluation and eventual disposal. This is generally what people would recognise as the UK approach to these things, but we leave scope for any special requirements that the overseas client may have; particularly in terms of spiritual beliefs. It ill befits archaeology to be either squeamish or show disrespect. It can be a really touchy subject at times where the locals believe the past should remain buried - particularly if it's their ancestors.
Establishing a massive international standard would be fraught with extra cares and attentions which may well cause delays and that's good neither for the project nor the finds/remains.
I think we have to trust the local client/consultant and our agent to make the right specification in these matters as a matter of common sense and good practice rather than establish 'practices'. Minimum standards insofar as having agreement on the ethical and legal treatment of material are essential and must surely form part of the contract entered into. I absolutely agree about making assumptions over local custom, and work overseas where there's a risk of actually disturbing anything shouldn't be lightly entered into.
The UK approaches do travel well. It's generally only comments on local sensitivities and faith we get back - along with the final resting place method which we clearly ask to be specified. We clearly state, for example, that we won't transport human remains off-site. They are to be collected by a local organisation.
If I express an opinion, shoot the boss. He's a bad man.
Establishing a massive international standard would be fraught with extra cares and attentions which may well cause delays and that's good neither for the project nor the finds/remains.
I think we have to trust the local client/consultant and our agent to make the right specification in these matters as a matter of common sense and good practice rather than establish 'practices'. Minimum standards insofar as having agreement on the ethical and legal treatment of material are essential and must surely form part of the contract entered into. I absolutely agree about making assumptions over local custom, and work overseas where there's a risk of actually disturbing anything shouldn't be lightly entered into.
The UK approaches do travel well. It's generally only comments on local sensitivities and faith we get back - along with the final resting place method which we clearly ask to be specified. We clearly state, for example, that we won't transport human remains off-site. They are to be collected by a local organisation.
If I express an opinion, shoot the boss. He's a bad man.