Biggar Archaeology Dig: Daer Valley

[John Wells]

Any idea what this is?

http://www.armadale.org.uk/daervalley.htm
http://www.biggararchaeology.org.uk/
http://www.biggararchaeology.org.uk/pdf_reports/DAER_FIRST%20RESULTS_2011.pdf

[Unitof1]

is the white stuff snow? and is the big gash foresters ploughing out bronze age peat beds?

[John Wells]

The details are in the above links ;o)

(I have removed the quote and photo which can be found in the links - it is always better to see things in context)

[Unitof1]

it seems to me that the most interesting feature, having got rid of Diagon Ally, of your possible site is the edge "ditch" or is that the edge of the excavation. If you found nothing in that I wil have to kill you although I am starting to wonder if you have any evidence of a site focus and whether the rest of the wonderous survey needs a lot of salt pinches, but then I am a money grabbing whatsit. Just out of interest is the "site" the area: the snowy bit, which seems not to have that many well sorted large moderatly angular cobbles,- the bare patch?


A second area of stones on the southern lower side appears to have no obvious
function. I am sorry but you lost me there but on the other hand this could be one of those "classic prehistoric" sites. I would try and make a bit more of the mesolithic residual chert whatitamy things by identifying them.

[John Wells]

I am not a member of the Biggar Archaeology Group, but if I lived in the area I would be.

They are well known for their 'whatitamy things' ;o)
http://www.biggararchaeology.org.uk/pdf_reports/DAER_FIRST%20RESULTS_2011.pdf


http://www.archaeology.co.uk/articles/howburn-farm-excavating-scotland%E2%80%99s-first-people.htm


All is in the links.

[Unitof1]

In scotland do you know if you need an environmental impact assesment to plough up land like this.


(BAJR edit of company - remember we don't name names unless through me)
and this is about a site.... not anything else )

[John Wells]

I have no idea what the situation is for forestry planting. I just take photographs.
The Biggar group appears to have been given a free range to dig on ploughed and freshly planted areas.

[Unitof1]

Sorry I did a lot of presuming and came up with biofuels. I have often wittered about the damage done by subsoiling which to my mind makes all of TCPA archaeology a joke.

There seems to be some rather large gashes all over the place, which I presume are to "improve" the land for forestry. Presumably the fieldwalking was undertaken by what appears to be volunteioers, are they. I cant realy fish out from the literature if their is any commercial archaeology going on here. Whos land is the so called site on or is it sites? I only ask so that we can all thank them for saving the planet from commercial archaeologists. Possibly somebody shouldnt put a rather large area arieal photo up and ask what it is, or rather if they do maybe they were expecting the spanish inqursition

[John Wells]

Yes, everything is done by volunteers, come rain, shine, snow, sleet, frost.......
Non of the work is commercial.
The land owner, I assume, is the company named at the end of the pdf link. The company is supportive of the Biggar group's work.

There appears to be little to see in higher visible spectrum aerial photos. The distribution of stones in ploughed areas could show up well in the thermal infra-red (and also in the near ultra-violet if washed clean by the rain) if the camera was not too high.

The area is vast, with multiple 1m test pits revealing an unusually high number of flints etc

[Unitof1]

"There appears to be little to see in higher visible spectrum aerial photos. The distribution of stones in ploughed areas could show up well in the thermal infra-red (and also in the near ultra-violet
if washed clean by the rain) if the camera was not too high" ----
---

Hello John
“Little to see” is a bit of an operative word here. It can be split between an explorative/interpretative sense and a document or record. Whenever I look at a picture I have to think of the archaeologist who took it. A lot of my pictures are loaded with why I took it. They are then weighed down with what am I going to do to make sure that the picture may end up unfortunately doing, rather than what I wanted the picture to do. So for example a picture as a record is normally taken to show what I have “done”. It gets a bit messier when it is a picture of something that I have not “done”, maybe in this case excavated. So for example what is the significance of the centre of the photograph or indeed where is the focus? And this is just the tip of the ice burg in what are you recording because there is also who is it recording for. Bobs Aunty, me or asking a question like what is it to the world wide web? Sometimes people take pictures because they think that’s what archaeologists do. Anybody can buy a pointing trowel and call themselves a plaster but I am not sure that would be enough for me. Or is it about the medium being able to last 100 years as a record.

I have to say it but your picture is for all I know a bit of a holiday photo, a nice bit of snow on a sight of rocks- look I took a picture of what some volunetrs were doing rather than rambling-

You asked for an interpretation but I do
feel that the picture in question presented in the way that it was is rather
credulous

Also what worries me about seeing the sight is the excavation of rocks when being undermined which then obviously find a new unsupported equilibrium. Its a bugger of a desicion but if your recording system is up to it you take the rocks out. Where its a barstard is when taking the rocks out is not done consistantly. We need a lot more information about the method of excavation employed.

The edge of the excavation seems to be very “presumptuous”,so they dug rocks which had been gathered together but as you said some “stones on the southern lower side appears to have no obvious Function” I am not sure that I can see any function elsewhere in the picture. Was it a cairn, wall , round house, broock.

When you say everything on this sight was done by vooliyrtryrs are you saying that therewere no professional archaeologists involved? If so please be very frightened but then I specialise in the wrong end of the stick

[John Wells]

'but as you said some.....'
I say again, I have not said anything (it is from the report) and in this case the photo is not mine either, it is our archaeologist's! (Woops! correction, that is not the archaeologist's image, his are better (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47204338@N03/sets/72157629111768101/) but one is very similar to the one posted in this thread).

'I am not sure that I can see any function elsewhere in the picture'
Exactly.

'if your recording system is up to it you take the rocks out'
Over how many square miles of ploughing?

'Sometimes people take pictures because they think that’s what archaeologists do'
That is what we would like to see more archaeologists do, especially from the air (http://www.armadale.org.uk/kite03.htm).

We look forward to the day when more people take 'holiday photos' like ours:
www.WestLothianArchaeology.org.uk
and consider a wide spectrum (http://www.armadale.org.uk/phototech.htm) investigation of archaeological sites both before, during and after exacavation:
http://dartproject.info/WPBlog/

We have had primary school children taking good aerial photos eg:
http://www.armadale.org.uk/cairnpapple.htm

Over and out ;o)

[Unitof1]

here, here

its just a pity that to examine the complex problem of heritage detection a consortium consisting of 25 key heritage and industry organisations and academic consultants and researchers from the areas of computer vision, geophysics, remote sensing, knowledge engineering and soil science, might be defeated by some 10 billion euro turn over ltd company sustainable boasting industry bod wanting to crop some subsidised wood pulp to make apparently non climate changing biofuel had not already trashed the sight of the archaeology with a bulldozer.

Dont worry have you thought that you might like to take pictures of trees instead, like a birds eye view.




I have no idea what the situation is for forestry planting. I just take photographs. The Biggar group appears to have been given a free range to dig on ploughed
and freshly planted areas.


sorry I thought that you took the pictures




'if your recording system is up to it you take the rocks out' Over how many square miles of ploughing?
so the concentration or rocks in the picture that you presented means nothing and the irregular outline of the apparent irregular limites of gardening more to do with wind direction and lunch breaks than some constantly reapparised research question.

'
Sometimes people take pictures because they think that’s what archaeologists do' That is what we would like to see more archaeologists do, especially from the air.


and where would you like us to stuff them because the the museums are stuffed to over load with voliterers holiday pictures

Do you know of a tree that is not named of its fruit asked the chichen of the egg, there always an exception said the rule.

[BAJR]

Just a quick comment here.

Unit... Play nice.
I know you are making a serious point. and it is one of how large companies 'care' for heritage. The Biggar Group are very important to me. And yes it is sad that a valley with so much archaeology is in such a parlous state. But don't poke the people who give a damn. Poke the system that ensures it is left to people who do.

So yes I agree, but you don't have to belabour the point

[kevin wooldridge]

Any idea what this is?

I surveyed something similar in size and form a few years back in southern Norway. The landowner told me that local legend had it that the structure was the remains of a drystone walled sheep-pen. Slight variation was that my version had an extended 'arm' on one side (not unlike an unenclosed figure '9' ), presumably to channel the sheep into the main enclosure.

[Unitof1]

The Biggar Group are very important to me. And yes it is sad that a valley with so much archaeology is in such a parlous state. But don't poke the people who give a damn. Poke the system that ensures it is left to people who do.

I thought that there was a system

The Environmental Assessment (Forestry) Regulations 1998.

Have you got any idea whats happening in this valley BAJR

when whats happening here ends up with a man with a kite who by the way might like to inform the glories that is something called DART http://dartproject.info/WPBlog/ that a german open sourcer has solved most of the problems with the octocopter http://www.geometh.ethz.ch/uav_g/proceedings/thamm_slides what do they need a million pounds for ho save your heritage from the evil forces (but we must not name them)... Biofuel (sic) oh I have gone and done it now.

[John Wells]

Hi Kevin. That is interesting. Were there any post holes in it?
A similar explanation has been given for these features:
http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=55.89341&lon=-3.749737&z=18.9&r=0&src=msl
here in West Lothian.

Unit
'a german open sourcer has solved most of the problems with the octocopter'
LOL, oh no they haven't! However, the more non-invasive techniques that are available the better.
Nice link though ;o), I will add it to:
http://www.armadale.org.uk/aerialphotography.htm

[Unitof1]

heres an old 2010 thread John

http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/showthread.php?2967-Future-of-Aerial-Photography&highlight=copter

[John Wells]

The problem with kopters is that they can wander off:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/i-spy-163-20k-lost-copter-on-capital-church-roof-1-1238129
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-15520279

I like kites because they are simple, cheap and can lift a heavy payload



......and not go walkabout.
Our thermal imaging camera (http://www.armadale.org.uk/phototech06.htm) is 1.5kg.
We will probably buy a cheap kopter at some time for use with compact cameras.