15th May 2010, 03:39 PM
Ok, lets get some things straight.
I absolutely agree that training needs are not being met in commercial archaeology. I was in the field for 20 years and did not have 1 single day being 'trained'. I also had to pick stuff up from day one on site. That puts me in the same boat as many people and also more than a 'so-called' archaeologist. In commercial archaeology the key is in the name - commercial. They (developers) will do things cheap, as it is in the nature of capitalism to do so, and units vie for business in the same manner. Do you think they will invest in a transitory work force with little union muscle? We are not professionals because we do not have a professional structure for field staff to be so called. That is a question for field archaeologists to fight to answer and all power to your elbow. I know it will be hard; I was a union official!
Cash for community archaeology has nothing to do with the field and how it is funded. Developers pay your wages through the units - basic. CA money would not go to field arch., even if CA projects did not exist. Money is not being sucked out of field archaeology by CA.
Principles, codes and standards apply to commercial archaeology because you are paid to do a job. People involved in CA projects, whether excavation or other, are not paid or working on commercial sites in the majority of cases. They work mainly on sites specially set up for CA projects or some people pay to work on specially designed training sites, run as a business. In 20 years I only worked on one site with volunteers as part of a specially designed project which had no impact on the other jobs undertaken by the unit. The need for codes, princilples and standards rests with the person(s) running CA sites/projects. That is why they need to have rigerous training of CAs by peers and archaeology organisations and thus avoid 'cowboys' taking over to make a quick buck from a growing trend. Codes relate to all who make a living by the subject.
So the past is private property?! Commercial archaeology is not the only criteria of the past. Just because we have worked for private businesses and paid by developers 'the past' has not been privatised. The activity of commercial archaeology should not be mixed up with the idea of the past. That belongs to all. Not units, not developers who own the land, not academics who teach and research it and not by those who find it. Do you take home what you find? Technically it is owned by someone, intellectually it is owned by us all.
People who wish to get involved in 'the past' in whatever way, are not trying to be Archaeologists (although they may want to go on and be so), just interested, like we all were at some point, before we became delicate little flowers wanting to keep archaeology all to ourselves and not have the 'great unwashed' poking their noses in. Any person working in CA is not looking to 'have authority' (show off) but is driven by a passion to enthuse anyone looking to touch the past for themselves rather than being put in the position of a voyeur.
Anyone who thinks that the trend for more public access to archaeology/heritage will fade and we can go back to our 'hobby' in peace is p***ing into the wind. If we want to be professional lets have a professional approach to making that access sustainable and positive for heritage workers and the public.
I absolutely agree that training needs are not being met in commercial archaeology. I was in the field for 20 years and did not have 1 single day being 'trained'. I also had to pick stuff up from day one on site. That puts me in the same boat as many people and also more than a 'so-called' archaeologist. In commercial archaeology the key is in the name - commercial. They (developers) will do things cheap, as it is in the nature of capitalism to do so, and units vie for business in the same manner. Do you think they will invest in a transitory work force with little union muscle? We are not professionals because we do not have a professional structure for field staff to be so called. That is a question for field archaeologists to fight to answer and all power to your elbow. I know it will be hard; I was a union official!
Cash for community archaeology has nothing to do with the field and how it is funded. Developers pay your wages through the units - basic. CA money would not go to field arch., even if CA projects did not exist. Money is not being sucked out of field archaeology by CA.
Principles, codes and standards apply to commercial archaeology because you are paid to do a job. People involved in CA projects, whether excavation or other, are not paid or working on commercial sites in the majority of cases. They work mainly on sites specially set up for CA projects or some people pay to work on specially designed training sites, run as a business. In 20 years I only worked on one site with volunteers as part of a specially designed project which had no impact on the other jobs undertaken by the unit. The need for codes, princilples and standards rests with the person(s) running CA sites/projects. That is why they need to have rigerous training of CAs by peers and archaeology organisations and thus avoid 'cowboys' taking over to make a quick buck from a growing trend. Codes relate to all who make a living by the subject.
So the past is private property?! Commercial archaeology is not the only criteria of the past. Just because we have worked for private businesses and paid by developers 'the past' has not been privatised. The activity of commercial archaeology should not be mixed up with the idea of the past. That belongs to all. Not units, not developers who own the land, not academics who teach and research it and not by those who find it. Do you take home what you find? Technically it is owned by someone, intellectually it is owned by us all.
People who wish to get involved in 'the past' in whatever way, are not trying to be Archaeologists (although they may want to go on and be so), just interested, like we all were at some point, before we became delicate little flowers wanting to keep archaeology all to ourselves and not have the 'great unwashed' poking their noses in. Any person working in CA is not looking to 'have authority' (show off) but is driven by a passion to enthuse anyone looking to touch the past for themselves rather than being put in the position of a voyeur.
Anyone who thinks that the trend for more public access to archaeology/heritage will fade and we can go back to our 'hobby' in peace is p***ing into the wind. If we want to be professional lets have a professional approach to making that access sustainable and positive for heritage workers and the public.