6th April 2014, 11:31 AM
Tool Wrote:The planning condition is the reason, not the process. And even a negative result is a conclusion to systematic archaeological investigation. Or research. Sorry for being a little pedantic, but I'm seeing a false dichotomy here, that you either do 'research' archaeology (considered by some the be 'good' archaeology) or you do commercial archaeology (considered by some to be 'bad' archaeology). To my mind, both are archaeology, both are trying to answer questions, both are feeding into the general body of knowledge, and both at least should be done to the best possible standards.In England at least, there are a series of regional research strategies as well as an English Heritage National Heritage Protection Plan......this could be considered as a research agenda for all 'varieties' of archaeology....
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...