13th May 2011, 01:19 PM
Jack Wrote:Project Budgets don't work that way. Their just wouldn't be the time or money to excavate hundreds of meters just on the off-chance of finding something. Much better to concentrate money and time on stuff that will hit more research priorities.
As Dino pointed out, there are much more interesting stuff to rescue on the site............Cursus are usually very long, presumably some of the ditches will remain beyond the development after the extraction Dino?
The ritual comment was because job specifications usually work on sample excavation of 100% of ritual features (and sometimes postholes), 50% of settlement related features and 20% or 10% of linears.
surely if there is insufficient funding to make an appropriate record then it should be left in situ?
project budgets are set according to a wsi which really should incorporate an academic research design based on current theory and past interventions - not based on the offer of a few bob to dig an old ditch.
i would be interested to know if the topsoil was completely stripped over the area to be quarried?
i know why you made the ritual comment but maybe i should have taken the time to explain why its use in specs from mounties should be abolished as misleading and inadequate to explain the complexity of the context of the features it perports to desciribe.
i just dont like digging by percentages because they are lazy, thoughtless and ultimately meaningless