15th September 2011, 08:22 AM
Quote:Why restrict this to large sites, how about insy wincy little ones which have never had an evaluation. Like watching briefs for little old ladies.
I agree it shouldn't be restricted to larger sites, especially if the old ladys site had free standing Neolithic and Bronze age archaeology, 3 trenching reports stating there was archaeology pretty much everywhere, and two geophysical surveys saying the same thing, as well as about a 150 years worth of published antiquarian articles talking about the archaeological finds farm workers have dug up there.
I think we should be worried about this news paper piece, it was badly researched and seemed to have been designed to attack archaeology, the real question that the reporter should have asked is why any of it happen at with all with what was known about the site? I first worked on this site 7ish years ago and i met people who had worked on it years before, for some reason they couldn't let this site go, that being the case i am sure that there were groups of people making a lots of money out this project.
Archaeology is the peeping Tom of the sciences It is the sandbox of men who care not where they are going; they merely want to know where everyone else has been.