 |
 |
Dear all, I have also been following this debate with interest. It is one that has been aired before many times. I remember the same issues cropping up in Yorkshire at a CBA conference some 15 years ago in relation to the publication of site gazetteers and whether to include 8,6,or 4 figure grid references. I argued at the time that one of the defining excitements and pleasures that many non-archaeologists had about archaeological issues was being able to stand exactly on the site of a Roman villa, medieval village or whatever and let their imagination take hold. As a boy, the ordnance survey map with its little cross depicting the location of some antiquity or other was the source of much pleasure followed as it invariably was with a bike ride to the field in question. Today, technology allows us to provide so much more information in a form that is challenging, accessible, exciting, innovative and above all useful in a community context and in the spirit and the letter of recent data regarding public interest (e.g. the MORI poll) we should perhaps be a little more circumspect about this matter. Having said that I know from my earlier days in Cambridgeshire that unauthorised and non-club related detecting is a huge problem in East Anglia but I have always believed that these rather ruthless individuals know exactly where all the 'good sites' are and although full publication of SMR information will offer a few more opportunities to them I am certain that the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. I share with others the view that the more people, particularly landowners, know about their own historic environment, the more they are likely to play a part in its stewardship, a view that has a certain resonance in those countries where the unwitting destruction of cultural resources has been so rife in recent decades. On the issue of e-government (Frank G.) I would say that I don't believe anyone is spelling out what should and should not be provided on-line and if an authority chooses to provide 4 figure grid references for archaeological sites and monuments that is probably their business although a few letters from disappointed customers may well influence matters! I am interested in the Human Rights angle in all this which in many ways is much more of a potential challenge. I believe that the Images of England database has already had to deal with this one and it wont be long before some landowner challenges the publication of a detailed map of someone's property on the web associated with an archaeological site. I leave you with this. What is the value of a 4 figure grid reference to Mr and Mrs Smith, their son and daughter and next door neighbour who are keen to explore the history of their village? And why should we continue to be such an exclusive disciple that feels it has to vet who can and cannot have access to 'sensitive' information? Bob Sydes Archaeological Officer Bath & North East Somerset Council ********************************************************************** The views and comments expressed in this email are confidential to the recipients and should not be passed on to others without permission. This email message does not necessarily express the views of Bath & North East Somerset Council and should be considered personal unless there is a specific statement to the contrary. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. Making Bath & North East Somerset a better place to Live, Work and Visit. **********************************************************************