Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2005
Having been involved on several TT sites over the last 3 years, and been involved with the site recording, archive management and on a number of occasions writing the final site reposrt I have seen the quality of the excavation by the TT archaeologists to be relatively high and a damn sight better than the work of many professional commercial archaeologists.
I was one of many archaeologists like most of you who bitched about TT being rubbish until actually getting invloved and seeing how well things are dug. Ok there's the odd one who shouldn't be let anywhere near a site with a trowel, but we all know people like that.
Perhaps it was different a few years ago, but things are differnt now, sites aren't trashed. Ok corners maybe cut to get things done quickly, but no more than any other archaeological evaluation, which is all TT sites are in the end, evaluations. And thankfully the majority of sites aren't subsequently really trashed by developers.
TT sites are research based evaluations.
Following a pipeline job or a road scheme might be interesting to most archaeologists but not for the majority of joe public, and its the public TT is aimed at. It is not ment to represent real archaeology or the work of commercial units, its a TV show about trying to answer a few archaeological or historical questions in a few days, more often than not at the request of a community interested in the archaeology and the landscape around them.
TT had raised the public image of archaeology and by being on for thirteen weeks of the year, with occasional repeats and specials, it keeps archaeology almost constantly in the public mind and informs them of the vast amounts of archaeology which surrounds them when often confidentiality clauses in contracts between commercial units and developers means the archaeological information isn't been made public.
TT serves a purpose in british archaeology by having a very visible face, and by raising the awareness of our profession amongst the public and developers. Ok so if some hairy arsed ground worker complains that TT could dig a site faster, explain what you're doing, and why it takes longer, don't jsut whinge about some thing which has raised the awareness of a profession which in the grand scheme of things isn't very important.
Dog} 
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2005
PS I work for a large commercial unit, and don't want to be aTV star.
cheers
Dog}
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2004
incomplete and missing reports...leaving sites in the hands of the marigold/knee pad brigade once filming is over...making ridiculous theoretical assumptions to please the punters...attacking sites that are not under any threat just to make good telly...portraying qualified professionals as nothing more than navvies..
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2005
Quote:quote:Ok corners maybe cut to get things done quickly, but no more than any other archaeological evaluation,
Quote:quote:TT sites are research based evaluations.
Sorry Surfdog, therein lies the problem. Research based evaluations have absolutely no excuse to cut ANY corners, least of all to get things done quickly for the cameras.
Despite the faults of commercial archaeology, and there are many, the work is usually done quickly only because if it doesn't it won't be done at all. It is usually destroyed by development. TT has no such excuses.
You say that the standards have improved, but I've lost count of the number of times a feature is shown to the viewers in Sectionbecause it has been machined away well into the obvious natural. Most commercial units don't let clueless idiots who might do that take charge of the big yellow trowel!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2005
A number of TT sites recently have been ones already involving the marigold/knee pad brigade as you call them that TT has visited and at least they have been able to show them the correct way to excavate features not just boxing things out.
I agree with you Mercenary that there is no excuse to over machine and leave features only visible in section, but I've lost count of the number of excavations I've been on which follow evaluation (by other units) to find that there has been considerable recent truncation as a result of the eval trenches, unfortuantely the big yellow trowel as you put it is often under the control of some one who doesn't know the natural where they are working and so over machining occurs. Its not just TT.
The whole point of having theoretical assumptions to please punters troll, is coz its a tele programme and they need to keep people interested that is why it doesn't represent real archaeology, and has never claimed to. If it did people would turn off, because most archaeology to the general public is boring, but at least by keeping it in the public arena and keeping the people intersted, the work that the rest of the archaeologists in Britain do will hopefully be seen as important. Especially coming at a time when money which would otherwise be going into the heritage sector is likely to be taken away and put into sport, and so potetntially seeing the ending of things like the portable antiquties scheme.
I think that there are so many factors threatening British archaeology, the heritage sector and the profession these days that attacking something that which has rasied the public image of a profession which the majority of the public and developers once viewed as little more than a hobby is a little sad.
cheers
Dog}
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Curator Kid
Quote:quote:Originally posted by mercenary
...I'd like to see County Mounties who sell their souls (and their regions archaeology) to get on TV with Crime Team publicly flogged. Then again maybe the public humiliation is enough, because they never come across well on the show.
No they usually don't. And that might be because they've got little choice in being there, and they're cringing as much as we are when we're watching. Time Team have never done a show in my County (thank God), but when they were scouting out around here, there was absolutely nothing we could do about it because we have little or no influence on non-planning related work. These things always go down well with elected members too, who are good at applying pressure to line managers, so if they'd have done a show here the chances are I would've been forced to go on TV with them, and have looked just as bad.
I didn't watch any of this year's show. I'm still waiting for 20 - odd reports of last year's Big Dig. :face-confused:
That sounds exactly the situation that we faced in my county. None of the mounties were at all keen on them being there,but as Time Team were invited in by a local historian and most of the trenches took place on private land their was naff all that they could do about it except ensure that their was a County presence from the unit. We,however were not in much of a position to influence anything. To give credit where it's due though most of the junior members of the team were happy to take advice when it was offered.
Still waiting for some kind of report for the SMR though, year and a half later. Not even so much as a summery sheet has been forthcoming though.[xx(]
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2005
But can't the mounties put conditions on the dig?
No written report, no digging for instance?
I'd ban em from digging full stop after what they did to us in Caerleon and Blaenafon was just a joke!!
deep
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
Quote:quote:Originally posted by deepdigger
But can't the mounties put conditions on the dig?
No written report, no digging for instance?
I'd ban em from digging full stop after what they did to us in Caerleon and Blaenafon was just a joke!!
deep
No! We can put conditions on planning permissions that say (roughly) "You will do the archaeology on the site according to an agreed scheme, before you trash it with your new building" We can monitor those conditions, and adherence to the agreed method statement. And the planning permission has a basis in law to take action if it is breached. The problem (and this is where the Govt & EH have [u]blatently </u>not addressed Article 3(i & ii) of the Valletta Convention), is that on private land, anyone can do to an archaeological site whatever the hell they like! This can range from ploughing it out, getting the locals in for a furtle, letting a metal detectorists rally happen on it, rent it to four-wheel-drive enthusiasts for a weekend, etc. etc. As has been pointed out on this forum previously, archaeology is a public resource. Fine! But the fact is that any member of the public can also go and dig it up - however (un)qualified they may be. There is NO LAW to stop them unless the site is Scheduled, and NO ONE formally checking that it is done properly. Even units act under these rules - I've just received a report from an IFA RAO, who carried out a watching brief on a pipeline in my County, that I didn't even know about. They were under no obligation to inform me, because the work was a statutory undertaking, and therefore not governed by planning permission. I have no idea if they were working to a method statement for this work. I don't know if it was monitored by anyone. Most units would inform me that they were working here as a courtesy, but obviously not all, and this one will be on the receiving end of a sharp letter from me in the near future. However I'm scratching around in the RAO guidelines to find quotable cause for complaint, and legally, they've done nothing wrong. The reality is that if Time Team or anyone else wants to dig up a site, all they have to do is knock on the owners' door and get his/her permission. Under these kinds of rules we should be thankful that TT even use some professional archaeologists! A joke it is - but don't lay all the blame at the Mounties' feet. Start having a whinge at the Government and English Heritage and APPAG, and lobby for some change.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
Absolutely right... when a developer wants to put up a hose we can advise on conditions... when a university wants to dig up SAM sites... we have no remit to intervene if it is ok with HS or EH. IF it is private ground... then it is up to teh individual - though Rural CSS sites do have a series of protective measures attached as well.
Another day another WSI?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2004
C Kid
Can understand the frustation of the above statutary pipeline excavations. Just a thought - perhaps you should be barking at the utility company and/or consultant? It's possible that the unit was in a difficult position re client confidentiality?
Can't comment on big dig as lost my interest in TT some time ago.
|
