JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH Archives

BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH  June 2003

BRITARCH June 2003

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Big Dig

From:

John Woodgate <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

British archaeology discussion list <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:13:07 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (72 lines)

Paul Barford <[log in to unmask]> wrote (in <00ed01c33731$a3c7a080$200
863d9@Standard>) about 'Big Dig', on Fri, 20 Jun 2003:

[snip]
>
>So it would seem that a letter was being sent out well over a year ago.

It seems that it did not go to anywhere near enough people in the
BRITARCH community. It would have been enlightened for TT to ask the
list owner to put their letter to the whole mailgroup.

>Hal's message generated a relatively large response, some of which
>concentrated on how much the archaeologists would get paid to do this work
>(versus the "money C4 would make out of it") and so on.


A natural reaction, but not one to create warm feelings between TT and
the experts. In such a case, again, if TT had contacted BRITARCH, the
question of modest honoraria might have been discussed. Even TT couldn't
get large fees past its bean-counters.

>Some of the
>correspondence concerned whether mere undergraduates would be able to
>fulfill this role.

I suppose some would, but many would not. That was my experience at that
time of life: some of my cohort were reasonably competent and reliable,
but far from all.

[snip]
>
>  I raised the problem of
>the potential public perception of the archaeological community as
>obstructive rather than supportive, which seems to have happened.

That is how it has appeared to me, too.
>
[snip]
>  I think also
>though that even if its not a good way to achieve an aim, its potential is
>still worth exploiting rather than simply dismissing it.

Agreed; the pursuit of the excellent often results in the loss of the
merely acceptable.
>
>Nobody (as far as I can see) has drawn attention to the online discussion
>which took place yesterday:
>[log in to unmask]@.4a914826/0" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]@.4a914826/0


>
>which made a number of good points (to in some cases some rather silly
>questions, and at least one archaeological sceptic).

Well, I didn't know about it. I'll see if it's still available.

[snip]

> Whatever one thinks about the Big
>Dig, surely its a useful alternative to the "go and buy a metal detector and
>see what goodies you can find" approach to the past. I would have hoped that
>whatever our initial reaction, we could find ways to build upon the results
>of the Big Dig.
>
I hope so too. Maybe TT will decide that another series IS justified,
and will run another BD next year, with better preparation and many
lessons learned.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JISCMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager