Festival of BRITISH archaeology ?

[oldgirl]

Redearth - I'm not disagreeing with the decision made, but wasn't it the north-east of England that voted against regional government?

[BAJR Host]

I won't disagree with that either... having spent so much time in Yorkshire.. - but I think it was Prescott?

"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers

[m300572]

"Redearth - I'm not disagreeing with the decision made, but wasn't it the north-east of England that voted against regional government?"

Mainly because the form of regional government didn't devolve decisions on regional matters down from Westminster but up to regional level rom Districts and Counties. After the first vote Prescott binned the whole idea, other regions would have voted againts as well on the same basis (I believe).

"Of course, in dealing with the North West especially, that's because there is no archaeology to speak of... "

At risk of breaching Mr Hosty's AUP - You can B:face-approve:gger off yourself!

As a single example we've got more of Hadrian's Wall WHS than the NE. (Strange you may think arguing from a Scottish identity to that of the NW of England but, like my old friend Weegie, we are cultural missionaries intent on spreading enlightenment to the unfortunate souls who were born and bred south of the Scottish Border and so have a dual outlook on cultural identity!)

[RedEarth]

quote:Originally posted by oldgirl

Redearth - I'm not disagreeing with the decision made, but wasn't it the north-east of England that voted against regional government?

I don't actually recall being asked to vote on the issue now, but either way I'm not especially in favour of devolution of power as such.

Even if it happened it would necessarily help the perceptions held by some people.

[oldgirl]

quote:Originally posted by m300572

"
"(Strange you may think arguing from a Scottish identity to that of the NW of England but, like my old friend Weegie, we are cultural missionaries intent on spreading enlightenment to the unfortunate souls who were born and bred south of the Scottish Border and so have a dual outlook on cultural identity!)

So you think those of us from Wales don't have a dual outlook? A large number of us even speak a completely seperate language. (As you can sometimes tell from my spelling!) (Plus, apparently, I'm a 'gog' to most people from south Wales)

I think a point was made ealier on that, in the periods that make up the majority of stuff that we study, the borders were slightly different to where they are now......

[oldgirl]

quote:Originally posted by RedEarth

quote:Originally posted by oldgirl

Redearth - I'm not disagreeing with the decision made, but wasn't it the north-east of England that voted against regional government?

I don't actually recall being asked to vote on the issue now, but either way I'm not especially in favour of devolution of power as such.

Even if it happened it would necessarily help the perceptions held by some people.

Too true. Some people I meet don't see or think beyond their own doorstep!

[RedEarth]

quote:

"Of course, in dealing with the North West especially, that's because there is no archaeology to speak of... "

At risk of breaching Mr Hosty's AUP - You can B:face-approve:gger off yourself!

As a single example we've got more of Hadrian's Wall WHS than the NE. (Strange you may think arguing from a Scottish identity to that of the NW of England but, like my old friend Weegie, we are cultural missionaries intent on spreading enlightenment to the unfortunate souls who were born and bred south of the Scottish Border and so have a dual outlook on cultural identity!)

You misunderstand my fellow countryman (or woman), but even with the flipping little faces it is difficult to expresses sarcasm via forum.

As someone who considers themselves fortunate to have been born and raised in the North West of England I of course know that there is plenty of archaeology in the area, without having to even mention Hadrians Wall.

My more general point is perhaps that the seperation (which is maybe now growing?) between England and Scotland (I'll leave everyone else out for the time being) isn't very helpful if you live fairly close to the edge of either. There are infinately more similarities in the archaeology of the region I work in with Scotland, yet the perception of English archaeology is very heavily southern biased.

I think I've probably lost my thread slightly in all the confusion!

[m300572]

"So you think those of us from Wales don't have a dual outlook?"

Wales is legally part of England!

(ducks and runs for cover!!!! laughing all the way. If you grew up in N Wales you ARE a gog! - Wales has the same problem as Scotland in having dual identity within the country - in Wales its the Southerners and the 'gogledd' and in Scotland its highland and lowland.)

[m300572]

"My more general point is perhaps that the seperation (which is maybe now growing?) between England and Scotland (I'll leave everyone else out for the time being) isn't very helpful if you live fairly close to the edge of either. There are infinately more similarities in the archaeology of the region I work in with Scotland, yet the perception of English archaeology is very heavily southern biased."

Right enough - the problem with the use of modern political boundaries to define archaeology is that is doesn't really work for those periods when the political boundaries were elsewhere. I must admit that I hoped that once Scotland had its own assembly the level of anti-English sentiment would decrease as it would become apparent that it wanst all "England's Fault". From personal experience the opoosite may be happening - this is on the basis of being a Scot, living and working in NW England and married to an Essex girl (in the geographical rather than joke sense - she has never owned a pair of white stilettos in all the years we have been married) and going up to Scotland reasonably frequently where unkind comments based on her Englishness have been directed against her.

[RedEarth]

quote:Originally posted by m300572


Right enough - the problem with the use of modern political boundaries to define archaeology is that is doesn't really work for those periods when the political boundaries were elsewhere. I must admit that I hoped that once Scotland had its own assembly the level of anti-English sentiment would decrease as it would become apparent that it wanst all "England's Fault". From personal experience the opoosite may be happening - this is on the basis of being a Scot, living and working in NW England and married to an Essex girl (in the geographical rather than joke sense - she has never owned a pair of white stilettos in all the years we have been married) and going up to Scotland reasonably frequently where unkind comments based on her Englishness have been directed against her.

I was quite surprised when I discovered that what anti-English sentiment did exist (and I can't say I've ever encountered much all the time I've spent in Scotland) made no distinction based on where you were from. You were English that was that. I thought that the Scots would feel some sort of empathy with people from Northern England (particularly the most northerly areas) on account of both being a long way from the centre of British/UK government. But apparently not. Now that there is a Scottish Parliament this is less of a problem in Scotland (unless of course you are a long way from Edinburgh, wheels within wheels) but remains the case in the North of England, with the additional snub that Scotland has its own parliament.

Regarding no archaeology in the North West, I never cease to be amazed by the type of comments made by some southern archaeologists I have worked with about the inferior quality of the archaeology. They just don't get it! Anyway, seemed to have strayed into a bit of a rant! This is part of a bigger issue regarding developer funded work where the largest and most massively funded projects tend to happen in the south where the money is massively distorting the amount of information and therefore perceived inportance of the archaeology, which is already heavily distorted by the increased amount of research anf other funding that has already been made available. In most cases round here we are still relying on the results of excavations carried out in the 19th century for sites that, had they been in the south, would undoubtedly have had at least one decent, funded programme of recent excavation.

Like I said, seem to have strayed into a rant, looking for a way out, oh, there is is...