The future of commercial archaeology from a digger's point of view

[2403381]

I'm not sure the IFA are the right people to do it anyway. Trouble is for better or worse it doesn't matter what the IFA do, they will always be seen as a union controlled by the managers of the very companies that are causing the issues. Unless it does something fairly drastic the general fieldstaff will always pick it apart. Don't get me wrong, I think the IFA is trying to do some good (Even if they do seem to take forever getting there) and you have to remember that even the managers of these big companies are on sh*t wages for the job they do.

What I'm getting at is this, even if they had the power to punish with teeth (as it were), and they did it in an honest and fair fashion. They would still be ridiculed and accused of being biased towards the company called into question due to having a senior manager on the review board! This is what I was trying to get at earlier with a governing body being at a higher level. Something beyond county mountie but national, as there is no equivalant at present the only existing body I can see that currently exists is EH. Not that I'm saying they are the answer, more that is the type of governing body needed. Something that can question the validity of not just the companies but the county mounties themselves if need arises.

[Unitof1]

dig-move on.

theres only a few thousand who bother to spend their lives looking at the ground. Let them be- even if they are cowboys or metal detectorists out of the billons on this planet. Hold on to your copyright.
I let you into a secret - your blind, you cant see half the things I can see, what right you got to dig a hole in the ground.

Answer no more than all the billions

Stop making out your better

[2403381]

I don't think I'm better than anyone? The only real thing I've learnt from digging is how little I know! But surely archaeology is a finite resource, once a site is gone its gone. We only get one chance to do a good job. I know its not fighting cancer or saving the world from alien hordes but I do think if we're going to do it then we need to do the best job we can! And too do that we have to make sure we put ourselves in the best position to succeed by removing the things that are currently allowing quality to drop. I know its a sickening thing to say (And I can already hear the groans) but our past is everyones past, what right do we have to decide what can be trashed, which periods are more important than others? I have no issues with anyone digging... commercial, research, volunteer or metal detectorists as long as they do the best job they can, display the finds, and disceminate the knowledge. Is this too much to ask for?

[Unitof1]

I think that its just a doing thing. You map out a space and take it apart. Some bits are above others. You think that you can see time frozen a bit,- ignore the worm burrows and other forms of contamination, Write a story -5byr slightly sandy silty clay in my opinion. what if you are better than anyone -it does not save babies

I have no issues with anyone digging

whats it got to do with a future, get involved, -make them pay-watch your back, pick a spot, take on all comers get your name on the record but know that nothing lasts foreever but in the future someone just might be digging your spoil

[Sith]

Something beyond county mountie but national, as there is no equivalant at present the only existing body I can see that currently exists is EH. Not that I'm saying they are the answer, more that is the type of governing body needed. Something that can question the validity of not just the companies but the county mounties themselves if need arises.

That is EH's job. The Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England (EH) is the Government's statutory adviser on the historic environment as defined in the National Heritage Act 1983:

'It shall be the duty of the Commission (so far as practicable) to secure the preservation of ancient monuments and historic buildings situated in England'.


The problem is that EH seems to suffer from two problems: that it is under-staffed (like everyone else in the heritage sector), and that it expends too much effort trying to be the National Trust.

[dmama]

i hope that unit of one starts taking his meds soon cos he's not making a lot of sense.
but i digress.
involving already existing organisations to produce a cohesive and workable whole is probably not the way forward. we have so many varied and diverse facets in our "proffession" that until we get a grip on what we actually do within those fields we will always be chasing our tails. that is what i meant about standardising ourselves. although i don't see why a regulatory system is such a bad thing. might stop the dead wood, bad practice and blatent work shy fops (read county mounties) from getting in the way of why we do this job. you can dig as many holes as you like but without recording sites properly and writing reports to the highest standard we might as well be gardeing.

[Sparky]

Dhama, are you referring to County Archaeologists as being work-shy fops?

Its seems to me that if you discarded the dead wood and mal paractitioners, the regulatorary body would have a diminished membership, hence why they cast a wide net.

[dmama]

to answer the question am i calling county mounties work shy fops? if the cap fits...
the title of this thread is The future of commercial archaeology from a digger's point of view. so by the very nature of the question i assumed that it is being put to people who work in the industry. therefore having an industry to be proud to belong to must, by it's very nature, mean that weeding out the chaff is not a bad idea... is sparky suggesting that those who don't or can't do the job that they are payed for should take the jobs of those who can and will. if that's what you are saying then this is an exercise in futility and just an excuse for a good moan... again...

[Sparky]

I really don't have a clue what you are trying to say. Are you trying to misrepresent me or are you misrepresenting yourself? You've certainly missed my point.

I wouldn't knock the local authority curatorial staff, as mentioned in another post, as their recommendations are the bread and butter of field archaeologists. They are also regulators of standards and practices without whom site reports wouldn't be written, sites excavated to an acceptable standard or excavated at all, research agendas compiled and recommended to contractors and archaeological advisors for their regions (apologies if I've omitted anything). Seems like a rather fancy and well deserved cap.

[kevin wooldridge]

I agree Sparky...I kind of also find its kind of bad form to diss fellow archaeologists who quite often are small cogs in much larger machines and like many of us constricted by the anomalous nature of archaeology within the planning system and its very loose legal framework. For f....s sake it's a job I wouldn't want to do.... so big hugs to all those that take on that burden on my behalf...