Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2009
P Prentice Wrote:maybe they are just better at it
Unlikely, I used to work for them before I move 'up'.
Suspect it's also an issue of subsidisation by the institution they are/are not attached to......................but this is all just idle gossip and pondering...........interesting though
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Jack Wrote:I'm sure with your recent obsession with pits you have enough material to write a book....
Nah, I said something
interesting (as opposed to everywhere) - anyway pits have already been done this year
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2011
Dinosaur Wrote:I've dug dozens of IA sites over the years and yet I can't ever recall seeing a well or water hole or dewpond or anything of the like
sometimes you get a an extra deep (waterlogged) pit in a pit alignment and sometimes you get a cistern on the base of an enclosure ditch - you just have to dig enough to find them
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2011
kevin wooldridge Wrote:Well I definitely would...cos its unlikely that anyone sent out an executive order telling folk to stop using flint just because some bugger had invented bronze!!
so by your reckoning neolithic pits were still being dug c.1000BC (like dinosaur) - or will you do 500AD in scotland?
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2009
P Prentice Wrote:sometimes you get a an extra deep (waterlogged) pit in a pit alignment and sometimes you get a cistern on the base of an enclosure ditch - you just have to dig enough to find them
Yeah was gonna say, based on how many features on such sites seem to fill up with water during excavations (annoyingly) maybe their would be plenty water around in the ditches and any open pits.
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2009
Dinosaur Wrote:Nah, I said something interesting (as opposed to everywhere) - anyway pits have already been done this year
Pits are interesting. Its just we haven't worked out just how interesting yet...............(especially when they are most of what survives of ancient activities).
But maybe if they were called 'reservoirs of ancient soil, artefacts and activities' then they may seem more interesting.
The word 'pit' hides the mysteries hidden within under the mundane imagery of some navvy leaning on a shovel and surveying their work.
Pit (n.) 1: a large hole in the ground; a mine or excavation for coal or minerals....etc.
-- Concise Oxford English Dictionary
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2011
Quote:But maybe if they were called 'reservoirs of ancient soil, artefacts and activities' then they may seem more interesting.
An inscrutable concavity?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Jack Wrote:Yeah was gonna say, based on how many features on such sites seem to fill up with water during excavations (annoyingly) maybe their would be plenty water around in the ditches and any open pits.
So what we should really be looking for is evidence for widespread malaria in the Iron Age population?
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
P Prentice Wrote:.... you just have to dig enough to find them
Explain that to the curators with their 20% of this and 10% of that excavation strategies....oh.....
