16th March 2011, 01:14 PM
P Prentice Wrote:is community archaeology, as funded by the HLF, the future of honest-to-goodness research excavation, able to go where development isn't, able to draw support from a wide range of do-goodin bodies, and presumably then, able to hire in professional standard training and support? Is then the CBA exactly the right body to dole out the grants?
I don't necessarily think that CBA would be the WORST body to hand out such grants, but...
.... At the end of the day (and I accept David's general critique), the CBA exists as one of a number of bodies in a field littered with bodies. Quite why it necessary to have the National Triust(s), English Heritage, CADW, Historic Scotland, DoE (NI), CBA, IfA, Societies of Antiquaries, BAA, DCMS, PAS; hundreds of local curators, museums, universities and development archaeologists etc etc all doing much the same thing that one single body could manage to do quite efficiently and effectively has always puzzled me...I support the principle of the CBA and remember with affection and gratitude that in my early days in archaeology (and certainly pre-BAJR) it was an important conduit for finding out about projects and getting work. I suspect however if it were to go now, it would not leave a substantial hole in the ground...certainly not as regards professional archaeology anyway.
But in these troubled times, I subscribe wholeheartedly to the Niemoller Principle (First they came for the CBA and I didn't speak out.....when they came for me there was no-one left to speak out!!) so I don't think that we can stand by and allow archaeology to be diminished by allowing bodies such as CBA to fail due to apathy...
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...