Friday, 10 June 2016

Failing to Agree

More from an FLO on the Lenborough Hoard fiasco. In response to an FLO's excited "Wow - it must be time to start rattling the donate tin as hoard really does need to be in a museum for all to enjoy" Paul Barford wrote:
The archaeological context needs to have been properly investigated for all to benefit from, but was not 2/2 this is just a heap of loose objects from a farmer's table. Tragedy all round.
At which point I get the  response from
PAS in the marches    8.06 Thanks Paul - I take your point - but don't entirely agree with you. Objects have been found in many ways

But then archaeology is not just about "finding objects", that is the whole issue concerning the involvement of PAS in the Lenborough Hoard fiasco. To say he "does not entirely agree" that it is not from a heap of loose objects that the public benefits, but when the archaeological context of a stratified group like this really disqualifies Mr Reavill in my eyes as anyone who should be presenting archaeology to the public. But then the PAS employs all sorts to create their "database' and do archaeological outreach. 

But I would say if that is the level of 'outreach' which the British public is getting from PAS archaeologists, the archaeological community may as well jack it in and save millions of pounds and hope the cash saved goes to real archaeology. And if it does not, belatedly cotton on to what they've been doing wrong all along. "Objects have been found in many ways" indeed. Pathetic. 

UPDATE 15th June 2016

  3 godz.3 godziny temu
Last night highlighted the success of as part of the and its reach across the UK

Obviously has very low expectations. "Success" at precisely what?

No comments:

Creative Commons License
Ten utwór jest dostępny na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Unported.