How should British Archaeology be run

[kevin wooldridge]

The last few contributions illustrate the point I was (tongue in cheek) trying to make.....its not the institutions that define archaeology, but the archaeologists themselves. As Kel rightly says if archaeologists entered the profession at 35 with responsibilites, families and homes, it is unlikely that anyone would be able to offer the pittance currently paid to the majority of 35 year old archaeologists....I have a great deal of sympathy with Trowelfodder's situation as well. Don't imagine changing the IFA, the CBA or any other initials would make the the slightest difference to her career trajectory....

[P Prentice]

as unit so rightly pointed out on another thread, the archaeology industry is a conceit that never happened. i would contest that it never will until a system of licensing is implemented whereby those with licences are rewarded adequately and those without either dabble or get a career somewhere else

[barkingdigger]

Considering the mish mash of different organisations that have a finger in this country's archaeology how do the forum members think the archaeological heritage of this country would best be managed, preserved and researched?

Can we rely on developer funded archaeology to pick up important archaeology befroe it is destroyed ?

Do we need stronger state intervention, legislation and a state run system? (is the current state set up of EH totally toothless?)

What is the point of University excavations (vanity projects?)

Should everything be open to the community (amatuers)?

Forget archaeology we all have worse things to worry about?

Enjoy

Some interesting issues here, all directly because we are letting the hobby (oops - profession!) be run under free-market terms.

My answers to the initial questions are:

1) As a Gov't-run Dept, with County branches - definitely NOT for profit!

2) Definitely not!

3) Yes! (and sadly, yes again...)

4) Aside from giving lecturers fodder for papers & books?...

5) No. Although we are all interested inm the story, shifting the dirt and making sense as we destroy the site is a skilled job.

6) Sadly, this is what is already starting to happen! Ref the consultation to strip out the LBC system.


All we need to succeed in this career is an independent income...

[RedEarth]

The last few contributions illustrate the point I was (tongue in cheek) trying to make.....its not the institutions that define archaeology, but the archaeologists themselves. As Kel rightly says if archaeologists entered the profession at 35 with responsibilites, families and homes, it is unlikely that anyone would be able to offer the pittance currently paid to the majority of 35 year old archaeologists....I have a great deal of sympathy with Trowelfodder's situation as well. Don't imagine changing the IFA, the CBA or any other initials would make the the slightest difference to her career trajectory....

How does any of that make sense? Enter the profession, suitably experienced presumably, at 35! Such as small-minded definition of archaeology - not the institutions that define us but the archaeologists - unfortunately probably true and why things are as ridiculous as they are - most are only out for themselves (truly Thatcher's children it would seem) and would apparently happily prevent the next generation of archaeologists getting started to keep themselves in work. Sorry, this whole thread is making me lose the ability to write. Some of the arguments given are so arse-about-tit it's difficult to believe people are actually coming out with them.

[P Prentice]

My radical solution.......introduce a lower age limit for archaeological field staff of 35. Nobody under that age would be allowed anywhere near a trowel (although of course they can play around at university and in record offices and even to undertake specialist work that didn't involve them directly in excavation to their hearts content)......if you consider all of the implications (far too many to mention here) it makes a lot of sense.....

better to forcibly retire all those lags over the age of 25 who still cant write a report, drive a car, or understand what a project design is

[Wax]

Before we get into ageism at both ends of the scale I think Kevin might be trying to point out that a mature individual with responsibilities and a bit of knowledge of the world (someone over 35) would not take the sort of s... that recent graduates are subjected to. As for PP's desire to retire those who have not progressed by the age of 25 that progression would be dependant on companies having a proper reporting and assesment system with internal training opportunities. You cannot fire someone for failing to progress if you do not provide them with the means of doing so.

The current system stinks becasue as others have pointed out we are subject to the free market and in that market our skills are not valued.

[kevin wooldridge]

Before we get into ageism at both ends of the scale I think Kevin might be trying to point out that a mature individual with responsibilities and a bit of knowledge of the world (someone over 35) would not take the sort of s... that recent graduates are subjected to. As for PP's desire to retire those who have not progressed by the age of 25 that progression would be dependant on companies having a proper reporting and assesment system with internal training opportunities. You cannot fire someone for failing to progress if you do not provide them with the means of doing so.

The current system stinks becasue as others have pointed out we are subject to the free market and in that market our skills are not valued.

Thank you Wax, precisely my point. I was trying to suggest that a suitable distance between archaeology and education would eradicate the blurry line between the job and the study.....but of course I mean neither insult to the aged or to the young.

I think that 'archaeologists' need to have more than one way of making a living and I was thinking if the first 10 years after university were spent pursuing the alternatives, those who came to archaeology at age 35 or there abouts would have a clearer idea of how to reconcile living and the demands of a career in archaeology....thats all. And as this is a fantasy, no-one need get worried about losing their job or anything similar.....but on the subject personally I don't think that achieving 'project officer' status (surely in itself a construct commercial archaeology borrowing from the building industry) is in itself the pinnacle or even much of a staging post in achieving happiness in life. And as surely most of us know, it aint much of a indicator of a successful and interesting archaeological career....now sailing the Pacific on a balsa raft, thats living. Heyerdahl was 33 at the time and only took up archaeology later in life.....

[monty]

an age when I'm too old to be useful as a field archaeologist

Too old ?????...NEVER too old !!

[Kel]

Very charidable, monty. Much appreciated. Misplaced, but appreciated!

[Sith]

I presume that to a certain extent this is a 'fantasy archaeology' thread because if so we can discard any options that require public funding of any aspect of archaeology. Since we now live in a world where the cost of everything is regarded as infinitely more important than its value to society, we can expect only a greater emphasis on the private sector. After all, they are so much better (cheaper) at running everything from healthcare to railways. Roll on 'English Heritage: a division of Big Corp.'