5th December 2007, 11:17 AM
Sorry Mr. Hosty, but I thought that the article was Cr[xx(]p of the highest order.
It's written from an ill-informed point of view with no examples to back up a set of sweeping generalisations. Yes, there are a couple of vaguely noteworthy points made, but the general tone of the piece suggests that it should be ok for non-professionals to conduct poor-quality archaeological work with little or no pre-planning, point or publication, and that those of us who work in professional archaeology should actively support such shoddy practice.
Besides which, if the authors of the piece had cared to do any research, they would've actually found at least one County bordering on their Greater London area that does indeed offer a streamlined system for registering and recording finds, a simple and easy-to-use template for project designs, and even a couple of Archaeological Planning officers who have a) given advice to community archaeology projects in the past and continue to do so now, and b) have actually worked in the field with such projects.
Perhaps they should also have a look at some professional standards documents and the Valletta convention before writing another article too.
It's written from an ill-informed point of view with no examples to back up a set of sweeping generalisations. Yes, there are a couple of vaguely noteworthy points made, but the general tone of the piece suggests that it should be ok for non-professionals to conduct poor-quality archaeological work with little or no pre-planning, point or publication, and that those of us who work in professional archaeology should actively support such shoddy practice.
Besides which, if the authors of the piece had cared to do any research, they would've actually found at least one County bordering on their Greater London area that does indeed offer a streamlined system for registering and recording finds, a simple and easy-to-use template for project designs, and even a couple of Archaeological Planning officers who have a) given advice to community archaeology projects in the past and continue to do so now, and b) have actually worked in the field with such projects.
Perhaps they should also have a look at some professional standards documents and the Valletta convention before writing another article too.