27th March 2007, 10:50 PM
My reading is that the £250 000 from external sources would be in addition to the work carried out for âin-houseâ excavations. However, I would be somewhat leary about using the (unreferenced) figures provided in order to double guess the operations of what is in effect a private commercial concern. Mind you that does not stop me being concerned at yet another whitteling of finds specialists, and I wonder what rationale there is behind jettisoning a potentially unique resource of specialists â Iâm not sure how the decrease in demand has been arrived at â I understood that there is going to be a bit of development in London over the next few years (!) so who knows what finds and periods will be coming up then?
In terms of what leic has been saying â I personally seem to be thriving in the freelance sector, with the main drawback being I have upped a band for my IFA subsâ¦
In terms of standards â I agree that appropriate marking should be part of the specification, although I would argue that if you are dealing with organisations that make reference to the IFA Standard &Guidance for the collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materialsâ or the IFA Finds Groupâs guide to finds have already obliged themselves to appropriate marking ( 3.4.4, 3.7.6, 3.10.2) as well as local archiving requirements. I also include in my standard terms and conditions the condition I expect the material to be studied should be in ( no one is going to send me unwashed pot again!)
My main concern is that properly accredited or recognised finds specialists are used as appropriate â which I think belongs to another threadâ¦.
In terms of what leic has been saying â I personally seem to be thriving in the freelance sector, with the main drawback being I have upped a band for my IFA subsâ¦
In terms of standards â I agree that appropriate marking should be part of the specification, although I would argue that if you are dealing with organisations that make reference to the IFA Standard &Guidance for the collection, documentation, conservation and research of archaeological materialsâ or the IFA Finds Groupâs guide to finds have already obliged themselves to appropriate marking ( 3.4.4, 3.7.6, 3.10.2) as well as local archiving requirements. I also include in my standard terms and conditions the condition I expect the material to be studied should be in ( no one is going to send me unwashed pot again!)
My main concern is that properly accredited or recognised finds specialists are used as appropriate â which I think belongs to another threadâ¦.