24th September 2008, 07:15 PM
It would be interesting to see how many Academics are active on BAJR.
If they are members of lists, it may be that Britarch (hmmm) or sub-discipline specific lists like environmental archaeology, are more their cup-of-tea.
...put your hands up for a quick poll! [or message me off list]
I agree, a useful dialogue should and could be set up in a more formal way.
Certainly I attended a gathering of the 1st Millennium Group, organised through the National Museum of Scotland a few years ago. Three commercial units were invited to present sites that excavations had recently been concluded on, but only the basic post-ex had been undertaken, i.e. interpretation of the whole site hadn't been completed. The mixed audience of academics, commercial archaeologists and other interested parties had a very interesting debate bringing a very wide knowledge base to bear on the raw data.
Although on-site it seemed that academic consultation occurred through established contacts or a company director was also an academic. There being a smaller community of archaeologists in Scotland, based in relatively few locations, mostly Edinburgh then Glasgow, perhaps the links are easier to form here.
And again, due to this, the publication of SAIR's [Scottish Archaeological Internet Reports - http://www.sair.org.uk/]and other site specific and regional reports are helpful in bridging the gap and updating the synthesis, presumably like the EH versions described by Paul Belford.
If they are members of lists, it may be that Britarch (hmmm) or sub-discipline specific lists like environmental archaeology, are more their cup-of-tea.
...put your hands up for a quick poll! [or message me off list]
I agree, a useful dialogue should and could be set up in a more formal way.
Certainly I attended a gathering of the 1st Millennium Group, organised through the National Museum of Scotland a few years ago. Three commercial units were invited to present sites that excavations had recently been concluded on, but only the basic post-ex had been undertaken, i.e. interpretation of the whole site hadn't been completed. The mixed audience of academics, commercial archaeologists and other interested parties had a very interesting debate bringing a very wide knowledge base to bear on the raw data.
Although on-site it seemed that academic consultation occurred through established contacts or a company director was also an academic. There being a smaller community of archaeologists in Scotland, based in relatively few locations, mostly Edinburgh then Glasgow, perhaps the links are easier to form here.
And again, due to this, the publication of SAIR's [Scottish Archaeological Internet Reports - http://www.sair.org.uk/]and other site specific and regional reports are helpful in bridging the gap and updating the synthesis, presumably like the EH versions described by Paul Belford.