17th November 2010, 01:07 PM
(This post was last modified: 17th November 2010, 02:03 PM by Jack.)
Kevin - your suggestion seems silly. You can't compel a client to do archaeological works outside of the area of impact (other than research) as the planning application on covers the area of impact only.
Think pipelines, and especially a pipeline following an existing gas main through a scheduled site.
My point (to everyone) was that often on a commercial excavation you don't get to 'understand' a 'site' fully as your only recording part of it, how can you possibly understand how what you've recorded relates to the unknown features extending beyond the impact area.
Furthermore the notion of 'the site' is an outdated idea. You can't 'understand' a settlement unless you understand the surrounding fields and how they were utilised, the the surrounding environment. So the idea that you keep digging until you understand the site is silly.
There are many cases where all you can do is record as best you can what is within the impact area, then in post ex go and search to see whats been recorded close by, and try and find parallels.
Over time, as BAJR stated, a peicemeal picture builds up and 'understanding' gets a little closer. Its not the place of a commercial digger to create an archaeological synthesis of a region (at the expense of the client), but to record what they found, then assess how further anaysis on the collected archive can address the stated research agendas...and finally to present the anaysis report within its chronological and regional context.
Think pipelines, and especially a pipeline following an existing gas main through a scheduled site.
My point (to everyone) was that often on a commercial excavation you don't get to 'understand' a 'site' fully as your only recording part of it, how can you possibly understand how what you've recorded relates to the unknown features extending beyond the impact area.
Furthermore the notion of 'the site' is an outdated idea. You can't 'understand' a settlement unless you understand the surrounding fields and how they were utilised, the the surrounding environment. So the idea that you keep digging until you understand the site is silly.
There are many cases where all you can do is record as best you can what is within the impact area, then in post ex go and search to see whats been recorded close by, and try and find parallels.
Over time, as BAJR stated, a peicemeal picture builds up and 'understanding' gets a little closer. Its not the place of a commercial digger to create an archaeological synthesis of a region (at the expense of the client), but to record what they found, then assess how further anaysis on the collected archive can address the stated research agendas...and finally to present the anaysis report within its chronological and regional context.