14th June 2005, 06:06 PM
Apart from size and depth issues with pilings, there is also the problem of drainage. Pilings and similar foundation structures will undoubtedly affect the hydrological regime on-site and thus alter the drainage system, which can prove catastrophic for the preservation of organic and to a lesser (but also important) degree inorganic items. Preservation in-situ can become unmonitored wholesale degradation.
With regards to Thornborough, I feel there are a whole host of issues muddying the debate which make me unsure where i stand exactly. I would be interested to hear the thoughts of others on some of them.
Thornborough's ritual landscape. Apart from the henges, how much of it is upstanding? The landscape setting in which the henges find themselves now is hardly that in which they were constructed, and many arguments against quarrying of the surrounding landscape often seem to me to be based on a form of NIMBY-ism rather than any real archaeological arguments. At the moment the archaeology is buried, it is being destroyed by ploughing etc (although i agree this aspect is easily exaggerated) and to build on our knowledge it will have to be excavated at some point. The question then is how, and under what conditions?
Whilst i agree that commercial archaeology often does not reach the highest standards due to time, money constraints etc, I would also argue that it is here that you find some of the best field archaeologists. I would bet a substantial amount (at least two beers on a diggers wage!) that a professional team would excavate to a far higher standard and produce more viable information in 6 months than a student dig operating for 2 months a year over 5 or maybe 10 years. What is lacking in my view is the coordination between academic archaeologists and field units, so that rescue and contract archaeology is conducted in an informed manner on the current intellectual debates and driving research questions. If this were achieved and time and funds were made available then real headway might be made in many areas, not just in relation to thornborough. Although i have a sneaking suspicion that many academic research excavations are largely about feathering the nest a little. Two months digging in the summer, 6 months post-ex every winter, 1 month planning every spring, 9months work and wages funded by some grant body.
This post is getting a little longer than intended, so will stop for replies........
With regards to Thornborough, I feel there are a whole host of issues muddying the debate which make me unsure where i stand exactly. I would be interested to hear the thoughts of others on some of them.
Thornborough's ritual landscape. Apart from the henges, how much of it is upstanding? The landscape setting in which the henges find themselves now is hardly that in which they were constructed, and many arguments against quarrying of the surrounding landscape often seem to me to be based on a form of NIMBY-ism rather than any real archaeological arguments. At the moment the archaeology is buried, it is being destroyed by ploughing etc (although i agree this aspect is easily exaggerated) and to build on our knowledge it will have to be excavated at some point. The question then is how, and under what conditions?
Whilst i agree that commercial archaeology often does not reach the highest standards due to time, money constraints etc, I would also argue that it is here that you find some of the best field archaeologists. I would bet a substantial amount (at least two beers on a diggers wage!) that a professional team would excavate to a far higher standard and produce more viable information in 6 months than a student dig operating for 2 months a year over 5 or maybe 10 years. What is lacking in my view is the coordination between academic archaeologists and field units, so that rescue and contract archaeology is conducted in an informed manner on the current intellectual debates and driving research questions. If this were achieved and time and funds were made available then real headway might be made in many areas, not just in relation to thornborough. Although i have a sneaking suspicion that many academic research excavations are largely about feathering the nest a little. Two months digging in the summer, 6 months post-ex every winter, 1 month planning every spring, 9months work and wages funded by some grant body.
This post is getting a little longer than intended, so will stop for replies........