26th June 2014, 09:06 PM
interesting discussion...
Marc and Jack both have a point;
A lot depends on the specifics of the 'site', > dba is whole different kettle of mud for, eg historic town center with industrial archaeology, formal gardens, historic records and many map regressions...vs. eg a large complex landscape with multiple relevant locations, previous investigations, multi-proxy data and long periods to consider. >> both quite necessary, and essentially close to primary research/data collation in thier own right.
However some DBA are just padded out SMR/HER checks - so i can sympathise with Marcs piont of view, especially when we consider the impact(or not) any of this has on field investigation...or the proliferation of the dreaded Consultant, who (IMHO) often lack the technical expertise to complete the more complicated DBAs all-on-thier-own anyway
Anyway; I am moving to thinking that basically our default position should be 'trowel every layer', unless (effectively) it can be cogently argued as unessescary (and justified, eg though data)
This is considerabley better than having to argue each time for the opposite.
Marc and Jack both have a point;
A lot depends on the specifics of the 'site', > dba is whole different kettle of mud for, eg historic town center with industrial archaeology, formal gardens, historic records and many map regressions...vs. eg a large complex landscape with multiple relevant locations, previous investigations, multi-proxy data and long periods to consider. >> both quite necessary, and essentially close to primary research/data collation in thier own right.
However some DBA are just padded out SMR/HER checks - so i can sympathise with Marcs piont of view, especially when we consider the impact(or not) any of this has on field investigation...or the proliferation of the dreaded Consultant, who (IMHO) often lack the technical expertise to complete the more complicated DBAs all-on-thier-own anyway
Anyway; I am moving to thinking that basically our default position should be 'trowel every layer', unless (effectively) it can be cogently argued as unessescary (and justified, eg though data)
This is considerabley better than having to argue each time for the opposite.