Peter wrote:
"Gary I don't think this is a case of technologies not being used, but
whether people have the budget for technologies to be purchased in many
cases! At the end of the day we probably have to many bodies running after
too few pounds."
----------------------

Peter there are lot of technologies out there that don't cost money.
Let's take for example the PAS database. 
The previous system cost a fortune and look at the problems it has caused.
Now look what Dan is doing with the PAS and using "open source" software and
other free third party applications.
Fantastic job and with little cost but government backed IT projects cost a
fortune and have to open things up for tender! 
Why don't more start using things in this area?

You are correct regarding too many bodies running around after little money.
I stated in a previous post that Archeology is also a paid discipline and as
you know many can do the same job without being paid  (I mean amateur,
retired, voluntary) which means you have to justify why you are worthy of
being paid and what people gain from this.  One poster has already touched
upon that.

The people high up in archaeology decide what is too a certain extent
"heritage of the day" and we have no choice than to except it.

I have also said it is very sad many are losing their livelihoods because of
cuts but this is happening in all industries throughout the UK.
Its really finding out what are the main priorities.  Is it health, pensions
and other services?
Lets face it many live for today and think only of tomorrow and not the
past.
It must be shown why these things are so important (each discipline within
archaeology is fighting for survial) then the general public will support
and ask for changes.

I remember as a child being fascinated by the Romans and gladiators and
still the general public is fascinated today by the very same thing.
It just seems that a lot focuses on the Romans (we know so much about them
now do we not?) and its seems we haven't moved on.
Just my opinion. 

Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: British archaeology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Peter Twinn
Sent: 30. september 2009 18:05
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] another museum faces the chop

Gary I don't think this is a case of technologies not being used, but
whether people have the budget for technologies to be purchased in many
cases! At the end of the day we probably have to many bodies running after
too few pounds. As much as those of us enjoy the vast array of heritage on
our doorsteps the cold hard facts are that not all of them can (or maybe
should) be sustained in the long term. 
 In Bristol we have a new museum being built that will cover more or less
every aspect of our history, but the loss thus far has been the British
archaeological section in the main museum. The reason for this is probably
varied, but one part which has affected this is the fact that the person
running the Museum and art gallery is an art fan, so archaeology.....our
local and social history has been air brushed out! I'm sure the Banksy
exhibition has done nothing to redress the imbalance, so we can maybe expect
more of the same. My point being it ultimately depends of the agendas of
others as to what we're served up as our heritage, be that a working water
mill or a Victorian inland port. Unfortunately the vast majority of
decisions made by local authorities are made due to fiscal pressures and
certainly a lack of understanding of what we may lose by the showing of
their hands at the end of a meeting that most would rather get home from
than think for a moment what society may lose. I've not touched on how
English Heritage allocates their funds, or indeed of what the National Trust
do either, but suffice to say there seems to be a crisis for which the only
answer seems to be money...that no-one seems to have.
Just my opinion of course.

Peter