11th May 2007, 11:04 AM
Did I write heritage... must have heritage on the brain!! I of course meant Historic!! (how embarrassing!)
And yes Peter, you have hit the nail on the head.. Archaeologists are not the right people to record a bus station (though I should add the one I am asking for record on is 1920's), The breadth of the Historic Environment (ah... done it!) is such as to require professionals in several disciplines, united under a common banner.. and as such, Archaeologists do archaeology, Historic Buildings Analysts record buildings, Social history specialists record social history etc... using archaeology as the catch all (as archaeology for better of worse is now firmly associated with sub surface features) belies the scope of knowledge needed and skills required. In as much as a Mesolithic specialist might not be the right person to record an industrial structure â not because they could not do it using similar methods, rather that it would take someone who understands industrial and industry related processes and background to best interpret what they were dealing withâ¦
How can an archaeologist who spends much of their time investigating sub surface features be expected to be able to record a bus station ? where is the framework or terms of reference âdifferent criteria, different methods, etcâ¦.that should be done by an architectural historian and a social historian.
Archaeologists too often stick the hand in the air and go â I can do that, I can do thatâ¦.â
As a Buildings Archaeologist â I see a clear distinction between recording a building with drawings and photographs and understanding a building and its function, spatial use, materials and form⦠that takes a different skill. And perhaps I can understand why the IHBC sees archaeologists as âpredatoryâ as it muscles into a lucrative market.
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
And yes Peter, you have hit the nail on the head.. Archaeologists are not the right people to record a bus station (though I should add the one I am asking for record on is 1920's), The breadth of the Historic Environment (ah... done it!) is such as to require professionals in several disciplines, united under a common banner.. and as such, Archaeologists do archaeology, Historic Buildings Analysts record buildings, Social history specialists record social history etc... using archaeology as the catch all (as archaeology for better of worse is now firmly associated with sub surface features) belies the scope of knowledge needed and skills required. In as much as a Mesolithic specialist might not be the right person to record an industrial structure â not because they could not do it using similar methods, rather that it would take someone who understands industrial and industry related processes and background to best interpret what they were dealing withâ¦
How can an archaeologist who spends much of their time investigating sub surface features be expected to be able to record a bus station ? where is the framework or terms of reference âdifferent criteria, different methods, etcâ¦.that should be done by an architectural historian and a social historian.
Archaeologists too often stick the hand in the air and go â I can do that, I can do thatâ¦.â
As a Buildings Archaeologist â I see a clear distinction between recording a building with drawings and photographs and understanding a building and its function, spatial use, materials and form⦠that takes a different skill. And perhaps I can understand why the IHBC sees archaeologists as âpredatoryâ as it muscles into a lucrative market.
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu