 |
 |
Hi Dan, Robert Maxwell from the University of Sydney here. Long time lurker and rare contributor! I wanted to put my two cents in on this matter, though, as I have just come out of several years working for a commercial archaeology firm. In Australia there is a definite bias against the recording of contemporary material on commercial sites. A strong one. The rationale is usually to do with budget constraints and/or their 'irrelevance' to the excavation. Naturally, this got my nose out of joint on more than one occasion, but that is the prevailing dig culture as it stands today. It is changing, but it seems to be a much slower process in consultancy than it is in the academy. I dare say the obvious answer is that the level to which people embrace the recent past is largely determined by its relevance to the project in question, but as a rule in Sydney anything post-WWI tends to get turfed before recording begins. That's unless I get my hands on it first. In my opinion? Champion idea. A project oriented toward investigating approaches toward contemporary material culture in consultancy would be a fascinating question. It's an important one because we may well be seeing a hyper-depletion of the record with no viable way to quantify how or why that is significant. Cheers, -Robert. ________________________________________ From: Discussion List for Contemporary and Historical Archaeology [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Dan Broadbent [[log in to unmask]] Sent: Friday, 18 May 2012 7:30 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Commercial contemporary archaeology? I've recently been working for a commercial archaeology unit on a rural site ahead of major development. There are a number of modern structures across the site, all of which will be lost to the development. These include sheds and improvised animal enclosures. Interestingly several of these have been constructed from motorway crash barriers. My employers have little interest in these structures but I feel they should be recorded. Might they not provide an insight into modern farming practices which might otherwise be lost? Is there not a bias in considering them less 'worthy' than buried prehistoric or Roman remains? I am considering developing a project based upon such contemporary features and their place within commercial archaeology. I wonder if anyone has any thoughts on this kind of work. Do you feel it would be worthwhile? Does anyone know of any similar projects elsewhere? Many thanks, Dan Broadbent -------------------------- contemp-hist-arch is a list for news and events in contemporary and historical archaeology, and for announcements relating to the CHAT conference group. ------- For email subscription options see: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/archives/contemp-hist-arch.html ------- Visit the CHAT website for more information and for future meeting dates: http://www.contemp-hist-arch.ac.uk -------------------------- -------------------------- contemp-hist-arch is a list for news and events in contemporary and historical archaeology, and for announcements relating to the CHAT conference group. ------- For email subscription options see: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/archives/contemp-hist-arch.html ------- Visit the CHAT website for more information and for future meeting dates: http://www.contemp-hist-arch.ac.uk --------------------------