17th March 2011, 12:58 PM
My initial reply
It is good to see a constructive aspect to this debate (though to be fair, it was not so much a debate - more a look of desperation and a good deal of ranting - myself included). So many thanks Andy for moving it forward.
The clear voice of archaeology has always been a sticking point, indeed I refer the honourable members to the APPAG recommendations and findings from back in the mid 2000s to refresh our memory about what we already knew.
For example
Archaeology as a profession
Since then, what has happened? Feel free to tick anything off that has been achieved. BAJR did its small part by creating a database of specialists and enforcing a minimum employment terms and conditions in relation to responsibilities and pay. But the point is, we knew about all the issues with archaeology, and have done very little to deal with it. Oh, don't get me wrong, there has been a lot of discussion about what to do, but when it comes down to it, that's as far as it normally goes. So, why is it a surprise when we find it hard to work together? Andy's Titanic scenario is a perfect example of archaeology in action today.
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
To pick up on Mike Heyworth's comments, it seems like he is suggesting that the CBA is the voice of British (I use the term as a UK wide concept) Archaeology - though admitting bias - however the CBA is already dealing with its own cuts. The IfA have down-sized, and various other organisations including universities have their own issues to deal with, and who can blame them from trying to find a justification for survival. As Mike says there is already the ATF which "coordinates advocacy activities " So is that the vehicle for concerted interaction with others... or is it just another committee with different titles shared between the same names?
I went to the ATF website http://www.britarch.ac.uk/training/atf.html and was unable to find out what activities had been undertaken on our behalf, by whom and what the measurable outcomes were. Not a criticism but an observation.
Utilising Andy’s battlefield analogy further, it seems that like the clans at Culloden, each group acts independently to protect itself or enhance itself. Perhaps unfair? But perhaps true. The result, the well-disciplined government troops defeat the various clans. Game over.
I wholeheartedly agree with Andy’s suggestion that
We cannot win this alone, but can ally ourselves with other groups – Environment, Ecology, Arts etc who add to the wellbeing of our culture while not per ce creating a tangible ‘product’. United we stand – currently divided we will fall. Change is happening; it is how, as a sector we deal with it. Saving our own skins in the short term will result in real marginalisation, inclusivity will help us all in the long term. I recently wrote a reply to Martin Carvers Antiquity Editorial stating that we have a currency of knowledge that should be open to all – currently this currency is loose change rattling around in our pockets.
Rather than deciding who should lead the charge – we should ask publicly for those who wish to be part of it and have real stance that is consistent across all the groups. It is all very well us acting independently, but that will not work. The public has to feel that our loss is their loss, that our cuts affect their lives.
Who leads this charge is currently not the point, the need is for us all to agree how to act as one mind in the first place and understand ourselves as ‘Archaeology’ as a whole. To quote Sun Tse
[SIZE=3]So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
So my challenge is to ask… Do we really know ourselves and what we offer? Using the Tourism argument can be a red herring – what do we really offer and why is it a strength that is important. Who can we ally ourselves with to make our position even more relevant?
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
David Connolly
British Archaeological Jobs Resource
BAJR - www.bajr.org
Traprain House
Luggate Burn
Whittingehame
East Lothian
EH41 4QA
It is good to see a constructive aspect to this debate (though to be fair, it was not so much a debate - more a look of desperation and a good deal of ranting - myself included). So many thanks Andy for moving it forward.
The clear voice of archaeology has always been a sticking point, indeed I refer the honourable members to the APPAG recommendations and findings from back in the mid 2000s to refresh our memory about what we already knew.
For example
Archaeology as a profession
- no system for providing integrated training, accreditation or career structure
- dwindling number of specialists - need database of existing specialists
- interest in artefacts has declined - out of date or lack of corpora
- lack of synthesis of finds material with lack of common terminology
- lack sharing of skills and regional cooperation
- inadequate training provided for professionals with some dubious quality training schools being set up
- training needs to include health and safety on site; report writing, surveying, use of information for desk-top evaluation, staff management
- currently no meaningful code of practice or terms of reference to ensure consistency of standards
- need regulatory independent body
- need flexible local system with minimum standards, training and disciplinary action
- job insecurity with short term casual contracts
- units cannot charge ‘normal’ overheads of eg training and development and accommodation etc because threat of undercutting
- poor pay
- need minimum terms and conditions
- many professionals overworked and demotivated
Since then, what has happened? Feel free to tick anything off that has been achieved. BAJR did its small part by creating a database of specialists and enforcing a minimum employment terms and conditions in relation to responsibilities and pay. But the point is, we knew about all the issues with archaeology, and have done very little to deal with it. Oh, don't get me wrong, there has been a lot of discussion about what to do, but when it comes down to it, that's as far as it normally goes. So, why is it a surprise when we find it hard to work together? Andy's Titanic scenario is a perfect example of archaeology in action today.
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
To pick up on Mike Heyworth's comments, it seems like he is suggesting that the CBA is the voice of British (I use the term as a UK wide concept) Archaeology - though admitting bias - however the CBA is already dealing with its own cuts. The IfA have down-sized, and various other organisations including universities have their own issues to deal with, and who can blame them from trying to find a justification for survival. As Mike says there is already the ATF which "coordinates advocacy activities " So is that the vehicle for concerted interaction with others... or is it just another committee with different titles shared between the same names?
I went to the ATF website http://www.britarch.ac.uk/training/atf.html and was unable to find out what activities had been undertaken on our behalf, by whom and what the measurable outcomes were. Not a criticism but an observation.
Utilising Andy’s battlefield analogy further, it seems that like the clans at Culloden, each group acts independently to protect itself or enhance itself. Perhaps unfair? But perhaps true. The result, the well-disciplined government troops defeat the various clans. Game over.
I wholeheartedly agree with Andy’s suggestion that
- We do argue that what archaeologists do, our "added value," is what is under threat and that is important because archaeologists of all stripes, working with the public make a better environment for all of us at many different levels. Yes, in practical terms, for not much investment, heritage makes money for the economy from tourism. As has been recognised in the recent ARCH [Alliance to Reduce Heritage Crime] initiative from English Heritage, the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service, archaeologists can also help community cohesion and safety because shared knowledge of place and space helps bind communities together in ownership of and respect for their environment. Equally, public archaeology gets people out in the open air and working as a team across backgrounds and generations and thinking as a creative individuals.
We cannot win this alone, but can ally ourselves with other groups – Environment, Ecology, Arts etc who add to the wellbeing of our culture while not per ce creating a tangible ‘product’. United we stand – currently divided we will fall. Change is happening; it is how, as a sector we deal with it. Saving our own skins in the short term will result in real marginalisation, inclusivity will help us all in the long term. I recently wrote a reply to Martin Carvers Antiquity Editorial stating that we have a currency of knowledge that should be open to all – currently this currency is loose change rattling around in our pockets.
Rather than deciding who should lead the charge – we should ask publicly for those who wish to be part of it and have real stance that is consistent across all the groups. It is all very well us acting independently, but that will not work. The public has to feel that our loss is their loss, that our cuts affect their lives.
Who leads this charge is currently not the point, the need is for us all to agree how to act as one mind in the first place and understand ourselves as ‘Archaeology’ as a whole. To quote Sun Tse
[SIZE=3]So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
So my challenge is to ask… Do we really know ourselves and what we offer? Using the Tourism argument can be a red herring – what do we really offer and why is it a strength that is important. Who can we ally ourselves with to make our position even more relevant?
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
David Connolly
British Archaeological Jobs Resource
BAJR - www.bajr.org
Traprain House
Luggate Burn
Whittingehame
East Lothian
EH41 4QA