9th April 2010, 11:43 AM
I don't have anything to say directly on this subject other than - I like Richard Bradley and always enjoy his books. I think he raises a genuine issue that commercial and academic archaeologists would be amiss to dismiss out of hand. Secondly I have a great admiration for commercial archaeological organisations that, realising the limitations of the traditional journal route, have created their own publication outlets. I am thinking in particular of the Museum of London and Pre-Construct Archaeology (London) monograph series (but I know there are others as well).
Indirectly....It strikes me that the new PPS 5 guidance could be a way out of the dilemma of 'grey literature'. The guidance suggests (Policy HE12) that developers have a responsibility to ensure the publication and dissemination of the results of archaeological investigation and that this responsibility can be guaranteed by planning condition. As most commercial archaeology is planning related surely there is now a mechanism to ensure that the worst of practice highlighted in Richard's survey becomes a thing of the past.....(an unintentional pun!!)
Indirectly....It strikes me that the new PPS 5 guidance could be a way out of the dilemma of 'grey literature'. The guidance suggests (Policy HE12) that developers have a responsibility to ensure the publication and dissemination of the results of archaeological investigation and that this responsibility can be guaranteed by planning condition. As most commercial archaeology is planning related surely there is now a mechanism to ensure that the worst of practice highlighted in Richard's survey becomes a thing of the past.....(an unintentional pun!!)
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...