What was Archaeology like in the Past

[kevin wooldridge]

Sorry David, I wasn't trying to pass the buck to curators, but was just trying to illustrate that the H&S could impact upon the archaeological resource beyond just a straight question of the legality of the method of working.

I have plenty of sympathy with the problems of curators, but (as you said the other day in another context) one of the reasons they face such dilemma was that many years back someone somewhere decided that commercial archaeologists were 'unsuitable' or not to be trusted at self-regulating and needed an extra tier of management control. Hence 'curators'. Personally I never had problems with the old system and was quite happy to work in the same office and get paid the same peanuts as the person who was nominally the commisiioner of all my work. Work got done to a high standard by people happy to co-operate with each other...and we never ever undercut anyone else or undersold the product for mere commercial gain!! I think someone got archaeology and the banking indusry confused somehow....!!

[Dinosaur]

Around here it's a rather rare event for a curator to issue a WSI, they normally issue specs (often extremely generic) and it's the contractor's task to plagiarise them to produce the detailed WSIs (including all the health and safety guff) for the client to send to the curator/submit with the planning application for approval? - can't have curators writing all the WSIs, that's a major source of income!...no wonder all these units are going bust down south, no income from WSIs....aren't curators claiming to be overworked? }

[BAJR]

@ Kevin... No wories, I should have made it clear that I did not think you were buck passing to Curators, I was trying to make it clear that everyone turns to the Curator as the person who has to "police" BRitish Archaeology, know every legislation, kno

[GPStone]

Surely the bottom line should be 'policed' by the IfA with support and compliance by RAOs - if the IfA wishes to be seen as representing the industry and pulling companies together into one viable sector. Or is that not what the IfA is aiming for?

If I'm honest, I don't like the idea of policing through curators, it seems patronising and overly prescriptive, although I wouldn't necessarily dismiss the need for it.

We should all be compliant in good practise, voluntarily and willingly. Its understandable when so many companies are on the edge (and many have been there for some time) - and so many staff responsible for producing WSIs and DBAs which are seen as a way into more work are carrying that pressure. We all need a bit of self respect and pride for once, or is that to idealistic?

We have two options: to begin working with that self-respect or to tear each other to shreds until there's nothing left and the various markets we operate in have moved on. Now's the time for a bit of responsible leadership and innovation on a wide range of larger issues and this just represents some of that.

Perhaps its something about our commercial background which leads us to view curators as police. I'd rather see their role as offering balance and uniformity of compliance across their regional remits based on a reasonable evaluation of the evidence and whatever regional research frameworks might exist (whether this happens consistently is another matter). They should act as an anchor to ensure the work that is done is relevant and contributes, something which is important as an industry. It should be down to us under the umbrella of our appropriate and representative industry bodies to do the work to a high standard and not take the piss. The fact is, if we do take the piss all the time (like now? :face-stir, at some point (probably quite soon) we'll get caught out and called out by our clients and then we'll all be xx(! And curators won't have all that much to do with that situation.

Sorry, that went a little off topic I guess.......

[kevin wooldridge]

Perhaps its something about our commercial background which leads us to view curators as police. I'd rather see their role as offering balance and uniformity of compliance across their regional remits...

The system that has arisen does put curators in that role and you are right it is probably unfair. But it has been forced upon them. I was one of the people (back in the mid-80s) that went along to IfA meetings and conferences and warned against the path of rampant commercialism that the IfA seemed intent on endorsing through it's failure to support the then existing regionally and locally defined archaeological services. I can (if pressed privately and off record) name the heads of the two large units and the one national body who at that time most actively pursued this agenda. Not that it really matters anymore. They are all long gone, But unfortunately their 'memorial' is the state of UK archaeology 2011....

I think rampant commercialism was wrong then, and it's still wrong now!! Archaeology works best in a spirit of co-operation and not in the tension of competition. What archaeology needs now is people with guts and conviction (and influence!!) to stand up and say that decisions back in the 1980s were wrong but that it is not too late even now to change. I wouldn't stop any of the large organisations from bitching amongst themselves, but perhaps those amongst us who care, need to grasp a little of the 'Big Society' message and support the continuation of local and regional archaeology teams where they exist and are committed to the study of a locality and to support the establishment of more of the same. And allow those groups to prosper without fear of being squeezed by the 'corporates'....

[moreno]

I was trying to make it clear that everyone turns to the Curator as the person who has to "police" BRitish Archaeology, know every legislation, know every technique, know every part of teh county, know every greoup, do talks every weekend, visit classes every week, do excvations nd surveys with public groups, read evefery report and find every flaw, correct every spelling mistake, cross reference every bibliographic reference, visit every site and note every infringement of Ifa all the way to HSE ... and still have time for a conference or two to keep up with latest thought...

Something needs to be mentioned regarding personality types. Often whenever these issues arise in conversations with "curators", "county archaeologists", "council archaeologist" or whomever the responsible "officer" is for issuing the brief and or spec we work from, I am struck by the nature of the person and therefore personality I am working with. Lets not forget that "we" regardless of what role we perform within the whole archaeological program, insert our personalities. In my experience, some officers take it upon themselves to play the sheriff and act accordingly (spelling, legislation etc) others have a more amicable approach and will let you get on with the work, trusting in your experience and professionalism (until it's shown otherwise).

On the sub contract side of things, I have worked with some less than thorough management personnel. Seeing some of the documentation sent to "curators", "county archaeologists", "council archaeologist", I'm not suprise these individuals get the hump with "us". Personal responsibility goes a long way and frankly it appears to be lacking among some. I would be incredibly embarrassed to have a WSI sent back for basic corrections (punctuation, spelling etc). Yet there are those who rush to submit documentation because of agreements made to keep clients happy, only to have the documents returned for correction! Laughable.

What amuses me is that often, the contractors see the Curators as fair game, and if they get caught out, it's either an aggressive response, or seen as a work hazard (win some lose some/got found out that time!) Where is the self regulation? Curators do indeed produce specs that Contractors turn to WSIs, but then, the DC archaeologist had to justify why they wanted archaeology in the first place, and also have to specify a minimum requirement, otherwise the contractors would all cluster around the minimum minimum... just to get the job (harsh??? or fair??)

Hmm, to be honest, I can't be bothered with the pedantic nature our "profession" suffers from. Often it seems "we" are our own worse enemy.

[Sith]

I'm not sure what role the Curator should have in relation to health and safety, except for stepping in if he finds someone mattocking from a tightrope over a bottomless pit. And that is a basic responsibility of EVERYONE on or visiting a site. To paraphrase the HSE, you have the right:

* To work in places where all the risks to your health and safety are properly controlled.
* To stop working and leave the area if you think you are in danger.
* To inform your employer about health and safety issues or concerns.
* To contact HSE or your local authority if you still have health and safety concerns and not get into trouble.

But you also have a responsibility to:

* Take care of your own health and safety and that of people who may be affected by what you do (or do not do).
* Co-operate with others on health and safety, and not interfere with, or misuse, anything provided for your health, safety or welfare.

It's not the responsibility of the curator to set standards or police health and safety matters but it should be part of the discussions or WSI where safety factors could affect the way a site can be dealt with. And in those rare cases, safety should trump archaeology every time. I know we all love it but it's not worth risking your neck for.

[Beasley]

'no wonder all these units are going bust down south'

which units are those Dinosaur?

[kevin wooldridge]

'no wonder all these units are going bust down south'

which units are those Dinosaur?

Yeah I think we should be told.....mind you I guess 'South' is relative.....there is that road sign on the M74/M6 just before you get to the Carlisle turnoff that famously says 'Carlisle and the South'!!

[Dinosaur]

'no wonder all these units are going bust down south'

which units are those Dinosaur?

You've clearly not been following these pages too closely the last year or three?...BUFAU (or whatever it's been called more recently -lost track, is it defunct or merely down-sized), Greater Manchester, ARCUS..... oh, sorry, if you're somewhere near France they may be units 'up north'?