22nd August 2011, 10:06 PM
Thanks you Wax for returning the thread to the thread. Even I am as guilty - though I try not to be
I was on one site where the eval showed one thing and the full excavation (9based on it) was stuffed full. nobody was really to blame, it it the issue of trying to fit the infinite possibility of archaeology into the finite known of development.
recently the lovely Mark gave a talk in Edinburgh and showed a field with cows in it... and asked, is ther archaeology in the field... the answers were yes (we thought it was a trick) the reality? dunno?
Archaeology needs standards for each element WB Eval, Excvation ones that cover the country (not change from county to county) and a means of evaluating the quality... not the cost saving. Surely a worthy project for IfA?
I was on one site where the eval showed one thing and the full excavation (9based on it) was stuffed full. nobody was really to blame, it it the issue of trying to fit the infinite possibility of archaeology into the finite known of development.
recently the lovely Mark gave a talk in Edinburgh and showed a field with cows in it... and asked, is ther archaeology in the field... the answers were yes (we thought it was a trick) the reality? dunno?
Archaeology needs standards for each element WB Eval, Excvation ones that cover the country (not change from county to county) and a means of evaluating the quality... not the cost saving. Surely a worthy project for IfA?