19th April 2010, 10:26 AM
At the risk of being contentious, there's also the issue of units working in areas where they have no experience or knowledge and are hence effectively working 'blind', which can't be good for the archaeology - I occasionally wonder on some jobs what the h*** I'm doing there, and equally am appalled by some of the work that's been done by units from other parts of the country on what deep down I regard as 'my' patch. Some of the resulting reports have been horrendously lacking in background knowledge, or in a couple of cases I can think of have exhibited a total lack of interest at all in the context of the site ('the site was in a field somewhere up north....'). I gather it's heresy to pine after the old county units who 'knew their patch' in these days of commercial archaeology, so I won't (....ok, maybe just a little bit, but strictly in private). It might be helpful if county lists at least highlighted local archaeological contractors in amongst all the optimists/sharks from elsewhere?
Am playing devil's advocate to some extent here, since the crew I work for are to some extent (ok, quite a lot) guilty of this, although normally cos we've been taken elsewhere by a client (it's all their fault, honest govner....).
Am playing devil's advocate to some extent here, since the crew I work for are to some extent (ok, quite a lot) guilty of this, although normally cos we've been taken elsewhere by a client (it's all their fault, honest govner....).