Yes, from all I can see there was a watching brief. This article is apparently just typical
rubbish/lazy journalism. The A21 was a big project - I really doubt there was anything
untoward here - just the usual journalists seeking a headline about something they don't, or
can't be bothered to, understand.
for an overview
for a note about the advance planning for the watching brief of the brickworks.
I have no detailed knowledge of this scheme, but see such newspaper reports too often to
believe them. I have had similar reports of 'accidental' finds on projects of my mine, when
they've have reported on something we worked hard to to find and investigate. I have even
had the university add-in words like 'accidental' or 'stumbled across by students', because its
the only way to get newspapers to cover discoveries. It is quite likely that such a good degree
of preservation of the brickworks structure was unexpected (there is nothing flagged up on
the brickworks in the EIA) - but that is how the system is supposed to work - you both plan for
the expected and allow for the unexpected.
Just a few minutes of talking to those involved or even of searching the online documentation
might have permitted proper reporting of the find - but that would be too easy wouldn't it?
Would a journalist even know what a watching brief was? - or realise that archaeological
contractors are 'workers' on the scheme too?
Dr Tim Young
Email: [log in to unmask]
Phone: 07802 413704