Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
14th November 2006, 05:26 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by wombat
Come on, where have all the Romanists gone? Is the archaeological profession still on some kind of post-imperialist guilt trip that refuses to acknowledge anything resembing an empire? Roman archaeology is the best. Every now and then it gives you just a hint of something a bit more exciting to dig than another post hole.
The Romans?
What could possibly be more exciting than thousands of pieces of broken brick and roof tile?
(Yeah OK - apologies to Tile Man before he rings me up)
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
14th November 2006, 07:33 PM
I think most of the Romanists are on Britarch...[8D]
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2005
14th November 2006, 11:49 PM
What have the Romans ever done for us?
deep
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
15th November 2006, 01:54 PM
Don't you mean 'what have the Romanists ever done for us?'
It's all modern rubbish after 43AD anyway.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
16th November 2006, 11:16 AM
I don't think that 'Prehistoric' as a option is necessarily a good on - you really need to divide it up a bit more - I would put down Iron Age and Roman as period choices, there are lots of bits of prehistory that I'm not too fussed about.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2005
16th November 2006, 11:40 AM
Or, arguably, all the other periods are 'historic' - Roman, medieval and post-medieval all have contemporaneous historic records and documents to work with in association with the archaeological record. So there are only two categories...
'Prehistoric' - lots of boring post-holes, some seeds and pollen, you pretty much have to make it up.
'Historic' - lots of walls, roads, buildings, industry, pretty things to find - and you can still tell some great stories, but this time with actual evidence to support it.
...and the poll suggests that 'Roman, medieval, post-medieval & industrial' together are indeed more popular than 'prehistory'.
Hooray!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2004
16th November 2006, 12:00 PM
It has to be prehistory. I have to admit though that some of the tastier medieval and indeed Roman sites have prompted tingles here and there. In recent years I think the sites that have really hit my buttons have all been in Leicester during the Shires redevelopment. Sexy, proper deep strat no less! I go for prehistory largely because I`m interested in the dynamics of transition and, probably because of the enigmatic-I`m interested in funerary arch and the hideous term "ritual".
I have to say that whilst I do of course understand the value of Industrial arch, I just could`nt bring meself to get me trowel out for it...
Incoming!
..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
16th November 2006, 04:52 PM
I have to say that whilst I do of course understand the value of Industrial arch, I just could`nt bring meself to get me trowel out for it...
On the other hand, some of the more entertaining problems I have encountered have been on industrial sites - the layer that melted, puzzling over how to recover and 'small find' the beads of mercury in one feature, how to excavate without removing the ivy which was all that was holding fifteen feet of tottering masonry beside the trench together...............
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
16th November 2006, 08:44 PM
The archaeology of Space wasn't included in the options. How unfair!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
17th November 2006, 12:00 PM
Hosty You havent catered for my area of interest, I actually find the immediate pre and post Roman period of great interest.
http://www.detector-distribution.co.uk
If a job is worth doing, then its worth doing it tomorrow!
Homer (Simpson)
