5th April 2005, 08:15 PM
Peter Wardle archaeological consultant here.
In the early days we all had PhDs and extensive experience of field archaeology. Then came a wave of consultants from a host of backgrounds who were in the right place at the right time ? in one case the qualifications was an evening class in archaeology. In addition a number of X curators became consultants.
With the introduction of PPG 15 the need for people to advise developers increased. Every Unit started doing consultancy. People with relatively little experience were appointed into junior positions and have subsequently been promoted.
Being a consultant is not something a new graduate can do. Knowledge of planning law is required ? some have qualifications in Town and Country Planning. On the other hand doing desk based assessments is seen as a very junior role when in fact it is the key to good consultancy.
Our role ? to act as the interface between the planning and regulatory system, the people who wish to do something controlled by that system as well as the field archaeologist who undertake work on site. To make an assessment of what the historic environment situation is and what is a suitable way for the objectives of the employing organisation to be achieved within the context of a regulatory system which has few fixed points, can be arbitrary and a matter of opinion.
Our role is defined by PPG 16 and is very much to prevent confrontation between archaeologists and developers. Some people view consultants as the developers advocate arguing their case for them others see them as being an independent expert advisor. Some people see the role as being the ambassador of heritage at the enemy court.
We act as expert witnesses in legal cases or planning enquiries.
We have a role in awarding contracts for field work and ensuring that the contractors give value for money in the same way a quantity surveyor does.
In terms of pay and conditions a consultant is a BAJR grade 6 or 7 post ie 20k+. While this may seem a lot we are invariably the lowest paid in any project team. The ecologists and tree specialists tend to be paid more and get promoted higher. For what we do we are actually very badly paid.
As for our detailed knowledge of field archaeology I am unclear what is meant or how it is judged. A consultant tends only to do survey work rather than actual digging in any event. Not knowing how to interpret aerial photographs or geophysics is a major handicap. We might not use a trowel or mattock but we do do field archaeology.
Peter Wardle.
Here are a few things I doubt digging archaeologists will be able to answer.
What is the developer legally obliged to do?
What is the likelyhood that something will be found
What is the likelyhood that the planning authourity will refuse permission
What are the rules of evidence and procedures for court and public inquiries
What is the fine if I go ahead and bulldoze everything
Which of these bids is a good bet
In the early days we all had PhDs and extensive experience of field archaeology. Then came a wave of consultants from a host of backgrounds who were in the right place at the right time ? in one case the qualifications was an evening class in archaeology. In addition a number of X curators became consultants.
With the introduction of PPG 15 the need for people to advise developers increased. Every Unit started doing consultancy. People with relatively little experience were appointed into junior positions and have subsequently been promoted.
Being a consultant is not something a new graduate can do. Knowledge of planning law is required ? some have qualifications in Town and Country Planning. On the other hand doing desk based assessments is seen as a very junior role when in fact it is the key to good consultancy.
Our role ? to act as the interface between the planning and regulatory system, the people who wish to do something controlled by that system as well as the field archaeologist who undertake work on site. To make an assessment of what the historic environment situation is and what is a suitable way for the objectives of the employing organisation to be achieved within the context of a regulatory system which has few fixed points, can be arbitrary and a matter of opinion.
Our role is defined by PPG 16 and is very much to prevent confrontation between archaeologists and developers. Some people view consultants as the developers advocate arguing their case for them others see them as being an independent expert advisor. Some people see the role as being the ambassador of heritage at the enemy court.
We act as expert witnesses in legal cases or planning enquiries.
We have a role in awarding contracts for field work and ensuring that the contractors give value for money in the same way a quantity surveyor does.
In terms of pay and conditions a consultant is a BAJR grade 6 or 7 post ie 20k+. While this may seem a lot we are invariably the lowest paid in any project team. The ecologists and tree specialists tend to be paid more and get promoted higher. For what we do we are actually very badly paid.
As for our detailed knowledge of field archaeology I am unclear what is meant or how it is judged. A consultant tends only to do survey work rather than actual digging in any event. Not knowing how to interpret aerial photographs or geophysics is a major handicap. We might not use a trowel or mattock but we do do field archaeology.
Peter Wardle.
Here are a few things I doubt digging archaeologists will be able to answer.
What is the developer legally obliged to do?
What is the likelyhood that something will be found
What is the likelyhood that the planning authourity will refuse permission
What are the rules of evidence and procedures for court and public inquiries
What is the fine if I go ahead and bulldoze everything
Which of these bids is a good bet