understanding significance - archaeologists.net · 31 34 36 38 40 42 44 page 31 page 21 page 34...

Autumn 2011Number 81

This issue:

IfA ANNUALCONFERENCE

The Southportgroup session – a delegate’s viewp7

Ascribingsignificance inthe ‘Big Society’p18

Evaluatingsignificance inthe commercialsectorp21

IfA Conference –the nextgenerationp31

The ARCHAEOLOGISTUnderstanding Significance

IfA CONFERENCE READING 2011

Institute for ArchaeologistsSHES, University of Reading, Whiteknights

PO Box 227, Reading RG6 6ABtel: 0118 378 6446fax: 0118 378 6448

email: [email protected]

1A u t u m n 2 0 1 1 N u m b e r 8 1

O N T E N T SCContents

Editorial

From the finds tray

Advocacy Peter Hinton

IfA Conference 2011: assessing significance Kathryn Whittington

The Southport Group Session – a delegate’s view Joe Abrams

Realising the benefits of planning–led investigation in the historic environment: a framework for

delivery The Southport Group

Characterisation: where next? Emma Hancox

CPD logs, PDPs and training plans: a session review Gail Mackintosh

Assessing the significance of iron objects and production remains Paul Belford and Evelyn Godfrey

Understanding and protection: the application of significance in the historic environment and England’s

National Heritage Protection Plan Edmund Lee

Measuring the significance of historic designed landscapes in Lancashire: Local Lists and community

involvement Nigel R J Neil

Ascribing significance in the ‘Big Society’ Stella Jackson

Assessing significance underwater: just piles of old rocks, geophysical anomalies and shifting sands?

Mark Littlewood

Evaluating significance in the commercial sector Paul Sharman

Lovely – but what is it? The Rising Tide Project and research on the submerged landscape of Orkney

Caroline Wickham-Jones

Aren’t we all in this together? The importance of partnership working Jeff Sanders and Susan Casey

The experience of partnership working: English Heritage’s current ‘Miner-Farmer Landscapes of

the North Pennines AONB’ project Al Oswald

Self-employment and business start-ups David Cawdeary

Assessing significance for planning applications: preparing PPS5 – compliant reports for local

authorities Duncan Coe

Essential writing skills for archaeologists Kasia Gdaniec, Jenny Glazebrook and Alison Taylor

In recognition of professional development Anthony Sinclair and Kate Geary

IfA Conference – the next generation Nathalie Ward, Edward James and Holly Beavitt-Pike

Widening the audience for community archaeology: the significance of PPS5 Mike Nevell

Reflectance Transformation: an approach for imaging archaeological finds Graeme Earl,

Gareth Beale, Hembo Pagi and Nicole Smith

Forensic Archaeology Special Interest Group AGM John Hunter

Conference excursions Kirsten Collins and Karen Bewick

Recognising your achievements Kathryn Whittington

New members

1

2

3

4

6

7

8

10

12

14

16

17

18

20

21

22

24

25

26

28

29

30

31

34

36

38

40

42

44

page 31

page 21

page 34

page 6

2 3T h e A r c h a e o l o g i s t A u t u m n 2 0 1 1 N u m b e r 8 1

environment. By the time you read this I hope thatthose organisations committed to implementingreport recommendations will already be takingpositive steps. Doubtless IfA will be in the vanguard!

You may have noticed that this edition does notcontain the IfA annual report, which as a result ofmember feedback is now published online. This doesnot imply a lack of news on IfA’s part. On thecontrary, this year has seen the emergence of asleeker, more efficient IfA working ever harder togrow our network, raise standards in the profession,develop new guidance, and campaign for better payand conditions for sector professionals. Efforts topromote the interests of the historic environment tonational and local government are also ceaseless,particularly with such uncertainty relating to policyand legislation.

The growth in IfA activity was evident at Conferencewhere five Special Interest Groups held AGM’s,including an inaugural meeting of the ForensicArchaeology Group; one of three new SIGs launchedthis year. IfA will hold its own AGM on 3 October2011. Preparations are also underway for the 2012Conference which will be held in Oxford from 18–20 April. The theme for next year’s conferencewill be Partnership Working – creating effectivenetworks throughout the historic, natural and builtenvironments to maximise resources, increase publicbenefit and build a stronger sector. Meanwhile, in thespirit of 2012 the winter issue will provide a sneakpreview of the exciting things to come when thespring sunshine returns to mark the start of IfAConference 2012.

Karen BewickEditor

As guest editor of the autumn Conference edition ofThe Archaeologist it has been no insignificant task tocondense three days of lively workshops and debates,vibrant social events, stimulating sessions andresulting papers into a mere 44 pages. Yet the articles,session reviews and papers contained within aim toprovide you with a brief glimpse of what proved tobe one of the most successful and well attended IfAConferences in recent years.

The success of the Conference was in no small partdue to the efforts of a host of inspirational speakerseach offering different views and experiences relatingto the central theme of ‘understanding significance asthe key to assessing, managing and explaining thehistoric environment’. While some sessions focusedon macro issues such as ascribing value, significanceand importance across the whole spectrum ofheritage assets, others drilled down to the level ofparticular asset types and how they might be studiedand recorded. Meanwhile other sessions, such as thaton assessment of underwater significance, highlightedthe opportunities arising from new policy andlegislation for what is a growing area of theprofession.

Perhaps surprisingly, this undercurrent of optimismwas evident in other areas of the Conference,particularly in discussions of the report by theSouthport Group whose work was instigated by TarynNixon’s heartfelt call-to-action at the IfA Conferencein 2010. The report, which will have launched by thetime this issue goes to press, sets out a long-termstrategy for change in full recognition that economicconditions are likely to remain tough for some time.Nevertheless, there are numerous opportunities thatcan be seized now to improve the benefits stemmingfrom planning-led investigation of the historic

F R O M T H E F I N D S T R AY

IfA 2012 ConferenceOur 2012 conference will be held in Oxford from 18–20 April.

The theme for the 2012 conference will be Partnership Working – creating effective networks throughout the historic, naturaland built environments to maximise resources, increase public benefit and build a stronger sector. We would welcomeproposals for sessions, CPD workshops and excursions based around this theme. Please submit a short abstract identifying 2–3potential speakers to [email protected] by 31 August 2011.

IfA AGMThe Institute’s AGM will take place on 3 October 2011 at The Society of Antiquaries,Burlington House, London. For moreinformation please see the AGM event page(www.archaeologists.net/node/352). We havecontacted members with a notice andnomination form by email or post (dependingon your contact settings). If you haven’t heardfrom us by July, please get in touch.

BAG EGMIfA Executive committee, on behalf of IfA council has called an ExtraordinaryGeneral Meeting to elect a new committee for the Buildings ArchaeologyGroup. All committee places will be up for election.

The event will take place at 4pm, on Friday 26 August 2011 at the Guildhall,London. To be followed by a social event. More details including nominationforms (if you have not received yours) can be downloaded from the BAGwebpage (www.archaeologists.net/groups/buildings).

Free admission to the Historic Buildings Parks and Gardens Event, 15 November 2011 IfA members now gain free admission to the Historic Building Parkand Gardens Event held in November at The Queen Elizabeth IIConference Centre in Westminster.

Held annually for over 25 years, this major heritage conservation dayhas evolved from, and is held in parallel with, the Annual GeneralMeeting of The Historic Houses Association who allow, subject toseating availability, visitors and delegates to listen to their President’sAddress, to their Guest Speaker, John Penrose MP, Minister forHeritage and Tourism and to attend the HHA/Smiths Gore Lecture,this year given by The Marquess of Douro. Visitors to the event willalso have free access to the comprehensive all day exhibition, whereover 70 exhibitors will display a broad selection of products andservices used in the care, repair, conservation and restoration ofhistoric buildings, their contents and surrounding landscapes.

Free admission is available to all those who are either owners ofhistoric buildings or who are involved in the upkeep, restoration orconservation of historic buildings, their contents or associatedlandscapes. Members can register for the event by visitinghttp://www.hall-mccartney.co.uk/HBPGEform.htm.

Ed

it

or

ia

l

Contributions and letter/emails are always welcome. TA is made digitally

available through our website and if this raises copyright issues with any

authors, artists or photographers, please notify the editor. Accessed digitally,

web links are especially useful in articles, so do include these where relevant.

Short articles (max. 1000 words) are preferred. They should be sent as an email

attachment, which must include captions and credits for illustrations. The

editor will edit and shorten if necessary. Illustrations are very important. These

can be supplied as originals, on CD or as emails, at a minimum resolution of

500 kb. Copyright of content and illustrations remains with the author, that of

the final design with IfA (who will make it available on its website). Authors

are responsible for obtaining reproduction rights and for providing the editor

with appropriate captions and credits. More detailed Notes for contributors for

each issue are available from the editor. Opinions expressed in The

Archaeologist are those of the authors, and are not necessarily those of IfA.

EDITED by Karen Bewick and

Kathryn Whittington,

IfA, SHES,

University of Reading,

Whiteknights, PO Box 227

READING RG6 6AB

DESIGNED and TYPESET

by Sue Cawood

PRINTED by Duffield

Printers Ltd (Leeds)

Notes to contributors

Themes and deadlines

Winter: ‘Inspiring excellence in

public engagement’

deadline: 1 October 2011

University of Cambridge launch new MSt inBuilding HistoryThe University of Cambridge have a part-timeMaster’s degree, an interdisciplinary research-based MSt at Apsley House. It has been designedby the Faculty of Architecture and History of Art inclose association with English Heritage, and withthe Institute of Continuing Education at MadingleyHall.

The MSt is aimed at students from a variety ofbackgrounds who wish to become architecturalhistorians trained in both academic and practicalskills of building analysis and assigning value andsignificance. It will also enable students to situatebuildings in their historic area and landscapecontexts. For more information please see theirwebsite (www.ice.cam.ac.uk/mst-buildinghistory)

Our members and Registered Organisationbulletin has been running since January, and iswell received. If you’ve not been receiving yoursplease contact the office.

The Institute undertakes a great deal of advocacy work for the sector. Here is a roundupof recent activities.


England: NPPF Practice Guide

There is no doubt that government does not intendthe NPPF to contain guidance on implementation ofits policies. Government has advised us that it is notthe responsibility for government or its agencies toprovide that guidance, but that professional bodiesshould take on the role. Elsewhere those sentimentshave been expressed in terms of ‘sector bodies’,which casts the net wider. Gerry Wait and PeterHinton have attended meetings of a working party ofthe Historic Environment Forum to draft replacementguidance: CBA, ALGAO, English Heritage, THA,IHBC, Historic Towns Forum, Country Land andBusiness Association, Black Environment Network,British Property Federation and Civic Voice are alsorepresented.

England: Bunnygate

IfA responded quickly to Cllr Melton’s interestingviews on the desirability of removing historicenvironment provisions from the planning process inFenland District. The affair shows the direction thelocalism agenda may take unless (a) adequatesafeguards are in place and (b) those withresponsibilities are aware of them.

We worked closely with TAF colleagues and a‘clarification’ now been produced.(www.archaeologists.net/news/110704-taf-response-cllr-melton-clarification).

Scotland: Planning Advice Note onarchaeology

IfA has been pushing Scottish Government through itsplanning division and Historic Scotland to makerevisions to PAN42 ever since Scottish PlanningPolicy was released and NPPG 18 withdrawn.Progress has been made, and Peter Hinton hasrepresented IfA on a Scottish Government draftinggroup, and he reports that the most recent draft islooking sound. Publication is imminent.

Northern Ireland: PPS6

Before and immediately after the Assembly elections(and the passage of a planning reform bill in theclosing stages of the last session) IfA provided abriefing to the Northern Ireland Archaeology Forumon potential improvements to PPS6, in line withSouthport agenda.

IfA has provided text for a letter from NIAF to theCulture, Arts and Leisure committee at Stormont,requesting a meeting to brief MLAs on the issues andto get their support in getting the reforms takenforward.

Much depends on secondary legislation to underpinthe changes to planning law, and on the as-yetunclear timescale for the Reform of PublicAdministration: this involves changing the boundariesand make-up of local authorities, and devolvingplanning responsibilities to clusters of them from theDepartment of the Environment.

Peter Hinton MIfAIfA Chief Executive

Peter Hinton

England and Wales: Localism Bill

The Bill contains provision for both England andWales and if enacted would have particularconsequences for England with the introduction ofneighbourhood planning.

At the Bill’s second reading in the Lords, workingwith its Advisory Group, we provided a briefing to theAll-Party Parliamentary Archaeology Group on the keyissues affecting the historic environment andespecially archaeology.

The Bill is currently (7 July) at committee stage in theLords. Tim Howard and Archaeology Forumcolleagues (TAF) helped draft several amendmentsthat APPAG Lords will table during debates. Most are‘probing amendments’, not expected to alter the Billbut to force a policy response from government aboutconcerns; but one by Lord Renfrew of Kaimsthorn is aserious attempt alter the draft legislation to make it astatutory requirement of local authorities to maintainor have access to a Historic Environment Record. Thiswas a provision of the Heritage Protection ReformBill, which had cross-party support. Mike Heyworth,CBA Director and amanuensis to APPAG, has beenparticularly active in marshalling support for theamendment from peers: he and Peter Hinton havealso met with government to explore how they mightview the amendment, if accepted, when the Billreturns to the Commons.

England: National Planning PolicyFramework

Government intends to produce a single frameworkdocument to encompass all high-level planningpolicy. It will replace all existing PPSs includingPPS5, with all its hard-won improvements on PPGs15 and 16. The policies of PPS5 will be highlycondensed, with guidance on implementationallegedly eschewed by government, and it isimportant to ensure that the most critical provisionsare carried forward in the NPPF. Lobbying,particularly by The Heritage Alliance (THA), hassecured several undertakings from government not toweaken protection.

IfA individually, as well as via The ArchaeologyForum, has continued to lobby for changes to thegovernment’s draft to correct shortcomings in the textproduced by the Practitioners’ Advisory Group a fewweeks back. This draft would have left planning-led,developer-funded archaeology on a very shakyfooting in England, so we have had private meetingswith government and its officials to argue strongly forimprovements. The government consultation draft,released on 25 June, Includes many improvements.We will be scrutinising it in detail and usingmembers’ input.

ADVOCACY


This year’s annual conference came back

to our home in Reading. It focussed on the

theme of assessing significance, starting with

a panel discussion with leading historic

environment figures from IfA, FAME, English

Heritage, the CBA and Historic Scotland. In

response to feedback from members, we

also introduced CPD workshops at this year’s

event which proved very popular. Some of

the responses we’ve had from the feedback

forms are as follows

Over the last year I have been introducedto, trained in the use of, and now am usingPPS5 to guide the way I produce reports,project designs and assessments. Therefore,this session was appealing to me. I alreadyliked the group’s pro-active, enthusiasticstance towards how this piece of legislationmay be used; seeing it as a catalyst forpositive change. It feels good to be focusingon exciting possibilities, particularly afterthe last few years of economic challenge.

Following some introductory talks the session movedon to its principle objective: to present the SouthportGroup’s draft report to delegates and get theirfeedback. The 73 page report was summarized in aseries of presentations by expert speakers. Delegatesparticipated using red and green postcards that werewaved for ‘no’ or ‘yes’, respectively. The specificobservations of red card waving delegates weresought and discussed, in order to feed in possibleamendments prior to the publication of the report inJuly 2011.

The system of green and red card waving workedwell – with mostly green cards shown by a supportiveaudience. A pattern soon emerged of somewhatreluctant critics challenging nuances in the wordingof bullet points. Rarely were serious objections raisedand in all cases the panel, led by Peter Hinton, weresoon able to explain intended meanings and seek tore-assure questioners. At no time was an intractabledisagreement raised.

Among the subjects covered were the need forincreased co-operation between local authorities and community groups, the need for increasedcollaboration between heritage professionals, theneed for a system of accessible archive stores to beset up where research into records and materialcould be facilitated, and the need for commercialinvestigations to be carried out in line withrecognised standards. It certainly was a shopping listunlikely to meet with strong objections from asupportive sector audience.

Although well disposed to the principle objectives of the workshop I felt that that the report lacked data at this stage, and its absence left some delegates

concerned about likely support of clients and the wider public for some of the recommendations.

My own feeling was of a mis-match between the desirable suggestions in the draft report and my daily experience working as aProject Manager in the sector. Ideas about public participation in eachproject, about quality-driven tendering systems, interesting publicationsand innovative project designs are laudable but little can be achievedwithout support from our clients.

The session ended with a call for each delegate to write a postcard from the future, to describe what we would ideally like the sector to look like by 13 April 2021. This review enables me to send my postcardto you all…

‘In 2021 we will be entirely paper-free, working via tough, outdoorcomputers on which we record our investigations in plan, section andtext. This information is uploaded immediately to secure it, and work onthe assessment of remains can begin immediately in our labs. All surveyand photographic data is held in the same way and we have freed up somany shelves!

Our tenders are judged on a series of criteria. Price is important but so isour status as chartered archaeologists; our track record and our ability tocollaborate with developers to enhance the built environment. We arepart of a commercially-smart sector, proud and self-confident now that wehave left behind the self-effacing, apologetic legacy of our first decades as‘rescuers’ of archaeology.

County journals and monographs did not sell in large enough numbersand only ever reached a tiny audience. We now publish everythingonline. We upload all our investigations direct to the relevant HER websiteand a small number of our most interesting projects are disseminated viasite-specific websites and booklets, while a few travel as exhibitions. Wereach a potential audience of millions by using these techniques and wesave a fortune in printing costs.

See you there!’

Joe AbramsRegional Manager (South and East), Headland Archaeology (UK) Ltd

“The finds session on newtechniques was inspiring.”

“Widening the audience forcommunity in archaeology was verygood. Exciting projects.”

“The ATF training session was brilliant.”

“Understanding and Protection: hadclear focus on current issues.”

IfA Conference 2011: ASSESSING SIGNIFICANCEKathryn Whittington

The Southport Group session – a delegate’s viewJoe Abrams

Joe Abrams © Headland Archaeology

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1

We hope those who came enjoyed it, and we

would like to thank our sponsors, session organisers

and speakers, as well as the staff at the Henley

Business School and University of Reading. Next

year we will be in Oxford where the theme will be

‘Partnership working’. The Call for Sessions runs

until the end of August. On the following pages you

will find reviews of the sessions and tours followed

by some of the papers that were given in print form.


analysis commissioned from the London School ofEconomics, and from consultation on a draft report:each written submission on the draft report hasinfluenced and changed the final report. The visionsand general thrust of the recommendations havereceived widespread and very enthusiastic support,although unsurprisingly there are some disagreementsabout the detail of the recommendations. Theoverwhelming conclusion is that the sector is readyfor change.

The scope of the report is the planning-ledinvestigation of the historic environment. It does notcover conservation, design or conservation anddesign services, except insofar as good conservationdecisions are made on the basis of sound informationthat frequently arises from planning-led investigation.The report does not seek to cover investigation of the historic environment that takes place outside the planning process, though it does makerecommendations on closer working betweenuniversity, museum, curatorial and commercialarchaeologists.

With the principles of PPS5 as their catalyst, many of the recommendations can at present only beapplied explicitly to the English planning regime.When PPS5 is absorbed into the National PlanningPolicy Framework, it has been made clear in publicGovernment statements that those principles are setto endure. Reform of PAN42 in Scotland is underway,so some of those recommendations may haveapplication there. Reform of PPS6 in Northern Irelandand the historic environment elements of PG Waleshave been mooted, providing further opportunities for UK-wide application. But many of the findings are not restricted to a particular planning policyframework, and so many of the recommendations areof immediate relevance across the UK – and beyond.

The starting point of the Southport Group’s work was the recognition that there have been hugeachievements under the previous planning regime.Developer-funded archaeology arising from PPG 16has transformed our understanding of the past, andhas produced excellent examples of good practice. It is this good practice that the recommendations inthis Report seek to make more widespread. To beclear, the description in the economic analysis ofmarket failure is terminology that is specific toeconomics, and should in no way be read as anycriticism of curatorial, contracting or consulting

This summer saw theofficial launch of theSouthport report at an event in Londonattended by HeritageMinister for EnglandJohn Penrose.Feedback from boththe IfA conferenceworkshop andensuing publicconsultation helpedto shape the ultimate version. The publication ofPlanning PolicyStatement 5 by the

Department of Communities and LocalGovernment (2010), alongside a strong and insightful Government vision statementon the historic environment (DCMS 2010),offered an extraordinary and rareopportunity – of the sort that comes alongonly once or twice in a professionallifetime.

The Southport report has been prepared as a response to that opportunity by a small working party of historic environment professionals – theSouthport Group – that was formed following adebate at the Institute for Archaeologists’ conferencein Southport in April 2010. It sets out the key findings from a series of workshops, an economic

services, or of individuals. Rather, the economicanalysis recognises a quality assurance frameworkthat has depended on self-regulation but has operatedin a price-driven market that required the providersor specifiers of services to submit to self-regulation.There have been strong commercial drivers that workagainst the consistent delivery of the high qualityservices that commercial archaeologists in particularcan and wish to provide. We now have theopportunity to change that.

The report sets out a vision for public involvementand participation, research and the use of archivedand published results, for how historic environmentsector professionals should operate and for what theproperty and development sector should gain. Itoutlines a vision for the sector where management of the historic environment is a partnership betweenlocal authorities and community groups and wheredecisions proactively, confidently and genuinely takeaccount of public values and concerns.

Development-led research into the historicenvironment should be a collaborative ventureinvolving commercially-funded, local authority,higher education and voluntary sectors. Recognisingthe fundamental value of a solid record and evidencebase, development-led investigation should befocused on interpretation, understanding andsignificance, not on record alone. In all casesdecisions should be founded on sound knowledgederived from HERs mediated by expert professionals,and from proportionate and appropriate professionalresearch commissioned by the applicant into theinterests of a place and its significance. It should beconducted in a way that increases opportunities forpublic participation alongside properly resourcedcommercial practitioners. Voluntary publicparticipation is an adjunct to, not a replacement oralternative to, professional leadership. Commercialand voluntary practitioners should be encouraged toacquire new skills, and where appropriate to havethem accredited.

The report advises how to create a sector thatconsistently adds value to development bycontributing to the sustainable development agenda,to design, brand, place-shaping, securing consents,risk management, PR, CSR, marketing andsales/rental values. It sees a market for servicesinvestigating the historic environment that placesgreater emphasis on quality than heretofore.

Planning-led investigation and explanation of thehistoric environment should be commissioned tocomply with clear professional standards for person,process and product.

Based on these achievable aspirations, the reportmakes a series of recommendations which, theSouthport Group believes, will provide the sectorwith the tools it needs to implement the principles ofPPS5. Many sector bodies have already endorsed therecommendations, and there have already beenpractical offers of support and funding to take themforward. A good number of the recommendationscould be addressed through a stronger specificationfor standardised Written Schemes of Investigationdocuments. The Southport Group has completed itswork with the publication of this report and willcease to exist. It is now up to establishedorganisations and the many skilled and committedpractitioners in the sector to consider adopting therecommendations and products into their workingmethods.

The Southport Group

Peter Hinton,

IfA © Martin

Newman

Voting © Martin

Newman

(below) Taryn Nixon

© Martin Newman

Realising the benefits of planning-led investigation in the historic environment: a framework for deliveryThe Southport Group

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1


Kae Neustadt’s paper also considered the desire tocreate a tool for historic landscape management,specifically informing strategic and spatial planningdecisions. She presented an approach wherecharacterisation projects can be used as the basis foridentifying distinctiveness, significance and valuewithin the historic landscape. By attachingsignificance to heritage assets, this model movescharacterisation from being a descriptiveinformational base for archaeological research, to ausable method for evaluating proposed change andactive, positive management.

Green infrastructure initiatives have becomeincreasingly embedded in core planning strategies asthe principle policy framework for delivering multi-functional environmental benefits in the context ofmedium to large-scale development. AdamMindykowski’s paper considered the role ofintegrated Historic Environment Assessment (HEA) inthe context of green infrastructure planning. Thisremains a strategic concept with biodiversity ‘greennetworks’ and ‘honey-pot’ public amenity sites oftendriving the agenda. He argued that integratedassessment can provide context for HistoricEnvironment Record (HER) features; identify groupvalue, diversity, sensitivity and potential at alandscape scale. This then provides a baseline with

The value of Historic LandscapeCharacterisation (HLC) and Extensive Urban Survey (EUS) has been demonstratedand documented, but we are onlybeginning to realise their potential whenused together, or with other strategicprojects and datasets. This session exploredcharacterisation’s potential, and inparticular how it is evolving to meet awider range of planning and community-based applications, examined a broadrange of issues, and considered how allforms of characterisation can be used tomanage, protect and promote the historicenvironment.

George Lambrick opened the session with a criticallook at Sustainability Appraisals and StrategicEnvironment Assessments. He argued that not enoughconsideration has been given to the legal toolsavailable to ensure that characterisation influencesstrategic development planning. He outlined howwell-established characterisation practice principlescould be used to greater effect, while also suggestingthe need to develop methods to address the bigstrategic planning issues.

which to identify multi-functional conservation andenhancement opportunities. Historic environmentprofessionals have long recognised the value of localplace and landscape, but have not always capitalisedon how effectively characterisation can influencegreen infrastructure initiatives.

Andrew Young’s paper moved away from the purelyplanning aspect and looked at predictive modellingtechniques using HLC. He demonstrated how HLChas shed light on the below-ground prehistoriclandscape of Cornwall, by allowing an understandingof potential archaeological and historical attributes ofeach HLC type. In Cornwall the correlation betweenHLC types and archaeological sites listed in the HERhas been used as a form of generic prediction. Thishas allowed targeted evaluation and mitigation workin areas where there are no sites in the HER. Theresulting discussion highlighted the fact that, whilethis works in Cornwall, it does not to work for alllandscapes and/or site types. More research is neededin this area for the full potential to be realised.

Adam Partington focussed on the characterisation’spotential to engage the public with their heritage. Heused the example of the Heritage Connect websitewww.heritageconnectlincoln.com, which is providinga new method to connect communities with place.The website provides information about the characterof places, how it developed, and also allowsindividuals to add their own views. The website wascreated as part of the Lincoln Townscape Assessment(LTA). The LTA has developed a new methodology forurban characterisation, providing wide rangingdescription, and incorporating the public’s views ofcharacter.

Characterisation is a wellestablished spatial planning tool inWales as Judith Alfrey and AndrewMarvel discussed in their paper. Ithas developed and testedmethodologies that allow localdistinctiveness to be recognised.

They considered the success of characterisation as a tool for positive planning and regeneration while simultaneously inviting broader participation in the process. It highlighted the need for methodologies that are transparent andcapable of consistent application, backed up byguidance, training and mentoring, and supported by better access to data sets. They argued that supporthigh level government, and a strategic approach arekey to successful integration of the historicenvironment into both the planning process andcommunity engagement.

The session addressed, and also raised several keyquestions. Acknowledging that characterisation canbe an effective tool for capturing the historicattributes that contribute towards local distinctivenesswas central. Characterisation is increasingly beingused to inform planning and regeneration strategiesand decisions, however, there are still opportunitiesto capitalise on this more effectively. There arefantastic examples characterisation projects that havecontributed successfully towards planning,community and prospection initiatives, which clearlyset a positive trend that should lead furtherdevelopments. There are nonetheless opportunities topromote characterisation to a wider audience, fostera clearer understanding of opportunities, and developa more inclusive approach towards conservation ofheritage assets and regeneration.

Emma Hancox AIfAWorcestershire Historic Environment & ArchaeologyService

Looking down on the encroachment enclosure on Castlemorton common, Worcestershire © Worcestershire County Council

A screenshot of the Heritage Connect website

CHARACTERISATION: where next? Emma Hancox

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1R

EAD

ING

20

11


The PDP and CPD section of the workshop was runby Kate Geary of the IfA, while training plans werecovered by Kenneth Aitchison of Landward ResearchLtd. The PDP session abstract promised a seminarthat would shed light on clarifying personal andcareer aims and identifying specific learning goalsand opportunities to achieve them. The session beganwith a description of three kinds of PDP objectives;personal, professional and work. It was emphasisedthat these objectives should to be SMART: Specific,Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timetabled.

As the session was a workshop, however, not alecture, we moved straight into the practical activityof personally defining a goal for each objectivethrough discussions with a partner. We then read outour chosen goals. The members attending rangedfrom the recently graduated such as myself, toBursary placement holders, commercial workers anda new business owner. It was interesting andsurprisingly reassuring to hear what others had listedas it gave me confidence in the validity of my owngoals. However, this was only the beginning as thenext activity required us to define some practical

As a student member of IfA I attended myfirst Conference this year in need of careerguidance, focus and direction. Thanks tothe CPD workshop and the people that Imet I successfully received a little bit ofeach.

I booked my place at the Conference while stillunemployed; I graduated from my Masters in Januaryand had been job-hunting ever since. Fortunately theweek before the event I was accepted for the positionof seasonal Learning Assistant with the National Trustfor Scotland at Culloden Battlefield visitor centre. It isan interesting job and has provided a much neededbreathing space in the pursuit of full-time work. I was still, however, in need of long-term career advice and hoped that the IfA Conference wouldprove to be an ideal place to start. I was particularlykeen to attend the workshop on ContinuingProfessional Development (CPD) logs, PersonalDevelopment Plans (PDPs) and training plans in thehope that it would set me on the right track.

CPD logs, PDPs and training plans:a session review

steps that we could take to reach these goals. Againwe shared these with the group and by the end of thefirst half of the workshop I hope that I was not alonein feeling more confident that I would one dayachieve them.

Although Kenneth Aitchison’s following session wasaimed more at employers and companies, this didnot mean that it wasn’t also useful to employees likemyself. It was particularly helpful in outlining theprocess and reasoning for the performance review ofan employee, such as that which I had recentlyexperienced at work. Mr Aitchison explained thatemployers should use a review to benefit bothcompany and employee by finding ways to help theiremployees to improve – eg training opportunities. Iwas delighted to find out that my current employerunderstands this and is keen to assist employees byproviding opportunities to advance their career.

The workshop was offered twice during the threedays – I took it on the first day and it prepared me forthe rest of the Conference. After the session I thoughtmore about who to meet and what to attend. I wasfocussed on not only attending interesting sessionsbut furthering my personal and professional aims forthe future.

Therefore I came away from the conference havingtaken some active steps towards the professional andwork PDP aims that the seminar had helped me toidentify. Firstly, the seminar had helped me in findingout how to upgrade my IfA membership; secondly, Ibegan to get up to speed on archaeological policy byattending the opening address and the NationalHeritage Protection Plan session. Finally, I tookcertain steps towards working in communityarchaeology by making contact with helpful peoplesuch as Suzie Thomas at the CBA.

Overall, the workshop on CPD logs, PDPs andtraining plans gave me career guidance, focus anddirection, yet the people I met at the conferencereminded me why I had sought that career in the firstplace. I met various IfA employees and fellowmembers, commercial archaeologists and even theHead of Education at the CBA. Collectively they re-confirmed my passion for discovering what the pastcan tell us and using this knowledge to engage andinspire others.

Gail Mackintosh MA Hons MSc Student member

Gail undertaking research for her MSc. Photo: Gail Mackintosh

Gail Mackintosh

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1R

EAD

ING

20

11

I wasfocused onnot onlyattendinginterestingsessions butfurtheringmy personalandprofessionalaims for thefuture.


always obvious. Research and experimentation wascontinually challenging previous assumptions aboutancient ironworking. Sarah strongly emphasised theneed to consult closely with archeometallurgicalspecialists at all stages, not just post-excavation, anddrew particular attention to the EH Guidelines forArchaeometallurgy (http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/archaeometallurgy/).

This theme was continued by Tim Young, GeoArch,who showed how the application of trace elementgeochemistry and microanalysis alongside careful useof standard morphological and petrographicalinvestigations, can enable an increasinglysophisticated interpretation of archaeometallurgicalresidues. Answers to archaeologically interestingquestions may require the piecing together ofmultiple items of data, both from within anassemblage and from related assemblages.

Paul Belford, Nexus Heritage, outlined the role of theHistorical Metallurgy Society (HMS), which has beenthe leading forum for archaeometallurgical researchfor nearly 50 years. Bringing together archaeologists,metallurgists and historians with a wide range ofexpertise and interests, HMS provides importantmember services. These include several conferencesand meetings per year, a peer-reviewed journal(Historical Metallurgy), and advice, support and CPDopportunities for professionals. The Society hadrecently produced Metals and Metalworking (anational research framework), and was in the processof updating and enlarging its highly-regarded seriesof datasheets (http://hist-met.org/datasheets.html).

Eleanor Blakelock, Historical Metallurgy Society,outlined how metallographic analysis is the besttechnique for understanding ancient iron. Analysiscan not only determine materials and methods ofconstruction, but may also enable broaderconclusions to be drawn about social and culturalaspects. Eleanor suggested that early medievalstandardisation of knife-making may have beenlinked to increasing urbanisation.

Despite English Heritage encouragement of x-radiography for all excavated ironwork, manyprojects only do this selectively or not at all. SoniaO’Connor (University of Bradford) explained thathigh quality radiography of complete ironassemblages enabled much more information to berecovered, and permitted more targeted approachesto conservation. The wider adoption of this practice

This workshop showcased a number ofcurrent approaches and new developmentsin understanding archaeological ironobjects and production remains. Thesession examined theoretical and socialperspectives, as well as practical andtechnological issues. The HistoricalMetallurgy Society was emphasised as aforum for debate and communication.

Jessie Slater and Derek Pitman, University ofSheffield, opened the session, drawing attention tothe social and cultural contexts within whichprehistoric ironworking took place. They argued thatportable analytical techniques enabled much closerdialogue between field practitioners and their lab-based colleagues. Their case study emphasised howsuch dialogue enabled hypotheses to be posited andtested during fieldwork, thus allowing continualrevision of both high-level interpretation and day-to-day fieldwork strategy.

An overview of field evidence for early ironworkingwas provided by Sarah Paynter, English Heritage. She noted how quantities of slag recovered in thefield may not always reflect realities of operationalpractice; traces of furnaces, hearths, workshops andcharcoal platforms may also survive and are not

has been inhibited by poor quality archaeologicalradiography, and inadequately-prepared briefs andspecifications. Sonia also emphasised close dialoguebetween laboratory analysis and ongoing fieldwork.

Metallography is the best way to characterise iron,but its drawback is that it requires destructivesampling. Thus it is done infrequently, and when it is,samples are as few and small as possible, meaningresults are not always necessarily representative.

Evelyn Godfrey, Open University, outlined one non-destructive alternative: neutron diffraction. This allowsidentification of different materials and processes, withparticular application for artefacts that would never beconsidered for destructive sampling.

Dana Goodburn-Brown, AMTeC Co-op Ltd,concluded by looking at mineralised organicmaterials that can be found in association with ironartefacts, including insects and plant material.Scanning Electron Microscope analysis can provide

species identification. This was illustrated withexamples from a recent community project toconserve finds from an Anglo-Saxon cemetery inKent. CSI:Sittingbourne was an innovative initiative inwhich investigative conservation of iron artefactsfrom 228 graves was undertaken by professionalconservators and local volunteers, in a shopping mall‘conservation lab’ open to public visitors.

This very comprehensive workshop touched on awide range of techniques and approaches. Twoessential aspects emerged in all of the papers: closeintegration of field- and lab-based specialists, and theneed for all archaeological projects to considermetallurgical issues at the earliest stage of projectspecification and design.

Paul Belford MIfANexus Heritage

Evelyn Godfrey PIfAOpen University

Members of the Historical Metallurgy Society from the UK,

Ireland, Germany, US, Canada, Mexico and Argentina enjoy a

field trip to medieval and later ironworking sites at Rievaulx

(Yorkshire) led by Gerry McDonnell as part of their recent 2011

Spring Meeting and AGM. Photo: Paul Belford

Early Medieval

single-edged sword

set up for non-

destructive analysis

on the ENGIN-X

diffractometer at the

ISIS Neutron

Facility, Harwell.

Photo: Evelyn

Godfrey

Paul Belford and Evelyn GodfreyASSESSING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IRON OBJECTS AND PRODUCTION REMAINSR

EAD

ING

20

11

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1

17A u t u m n 2 0 1 1 N u m b e r 8 1

The principal aims have been to

• enhance the database of HDLs • validate by site visits• make information widely accessible, through the Parks and

Gardens UK website, Lancashire HER and LancashireEnvironmental Records Network

• devise and implement methodologies for characterisation andmeasurement of significance of HDLs

• compile Local Lists and test these through public consultation • prepare guidance for the conservation and enhancement of HDLs • select themes and raise additional funding for longer-term

research and to enhance public engagement.

16 T h e A r c h a e o l o g i s t

Nigel Neil, Lancashire Gardens Trust, then describeda project which sees Lancashire County Council,Lancashire Gardens Trust, and ManchesterMetropolitan University working in partnership toenhance the knowledge of historic designedlandscapes throughout Lancashire. An accompanyingarticle reports this in detail.

Finally Stella Jackson reviewed the nominations fornational designation received via the English Heritagewebsite http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/ (see separate article).

Discussion during the session highlighted thecomplexity of community involvement. A tensionexists between national, community and individualinterests. Who are the local community? The need for national oversight both for consistency and also as arbitrator between different ‘communities’ wasapparent. Desk Based Assessment procedures willneed updating to give greater emphasis tounderstanding the values and interests from all theseperspectives.

Different approaches to assessing significance arealso needed. Large area, cross-disciplinary studiessuch as Environmental Impact Assessments whichaim to gain a national overview for the NHPP willneed techniques for scoping significance of largenumbers of sites efficiently. Managing change toparticular assets or sites at the point when planningdecisions are made will need critical analysis at sitespecific level, with sufficient flexibility in approach toallow for the bewildering variety of England’s heritageassets.

Edmund Lee MIfAStandards and Guidelines ManagerEnglish Heritage

A well-attended session on the morning of day twoexamined techniques and philosophies for assessing thesignificance of England’s heritage at all levels, and applyingthat understanding to statutory and non-statutory protectionregimes. Barney Sloane, English Heritage Head of NationalHeritage Protection Commissions chaired the session andplaced it in the context of the National Heritage ProtectionPlan (NHPP), now available on the English Heritage websitewww.english-heritage.org.uk/nhpp. The Plan directs research effort to identifying strategic threats to the historicenvironment or to particular classes of site; to ensuring thatwe have adequate understanding of the significance of thethreatened environment or asset; and to determiningappropriate responses. To define significance he noted theformula, from ‘Conservation Principles’ (English Heritage2006), that significance is the sum of cultural and naturalvalues, noting that the cultural values (aesthetic, communal,historical and evidential) are refined further for planningcasework by the ‘interests’ set out in PPS5 (archaeological,architectural, artistic or historic).

George Lambrick, freelance consultant, examined the assessment ofsetting as an aspect of significance. Different approaches are needed, forexample between large scale Environmental Impact Assessment, such asthat in progress on the High Speed 2 rail project, and local assessment ofspecific assets or buildings. The type of impact, nature of change overtime, and the impact of changes in setting of values all need carefulconsideration. Conclusions were that current guidance is stronger onvisual impact, and absent or weak on economic viability of land orproperty arising from changes in setting.

Deborah Williams, English Heritage, reviewed work undertaken toproduce new guidance to accompany the reform of the heritageprotection system. This covers the criteria for selection in a wide range ofdifferent ages, types and scales of heritage asset, and aims to provideconsistency and transparency in the process of designation.

Cathy Tyers, English Heritage Dendrochronologist zoomed into to thescale of individual sites, even specific timbers, with her review of the roleof dendro dating in casework. Cathy presented past and current caseswhere new dendro dating has radically altered our understanding of aparticular building’s significance, including in one case the accuratedating of the sole surviving timber (a window sill-beam) in what wasotherwise a poorly dated roofless ruin.

UNDERSTANDING AND PROTECTION: the application of Significance in the Historic Environment and England’s National Heritage Protection Plan

A tension exists betweennational, community andindividual interests. Whoare the local community?

Edmund Lee

Protection Programme. Specific datasets can beextracted. The merits of a multi-period category areunder consideration.

The next step is to assign a score of 1–3 in responseto 13 questions, then total the scores. The questionshave been selected from around 30 used by EH,Historic Scotland, CADW, and the Northern IrelandEnvironment Agency for their Registers andequivalents

• completeness• archaeological interest and importance• architectural interest of buildings and structures• representativeness of a particular style; work of a

known designer • association with significant persons or historical

events• rarity• group or setting value• contribution to local landscape character• nature conservation / scientific / geological interest• horticultural / arboricultural / silvicultural interest

and importance• amenity value• documentation

LGT are considering whether to use ‘extent to whichsite is at risk’, as a multiplier, scores to some or allquestions thus being increased for vulnerable sites

Use of the system is still in its early stages. LGT arepleased that the project and methodology have beengreeted with enthusiasm from many quarters, and wewelcome comments about how to refine it.

Nigel R J Neil MA MSc MIfA LRPSLancashire Gardens Trust and Neil ArchaeologicalServices

In 2008, Lancashire County Council (LCC)agreed to fund Lancashire Gardens Trust(LGT) to undertake a 5-year HistoricDesigned Landscapes (HDL) in Lancashireproject. The project incorporated academicinput from Ed Bennis, taking his and Dyke’s1998 report, part of English Heritage’scountry-wide desk-based ‘Register Review’,as its starting point. Having suffered severefinancial strictures in 2009–10, LCC agreedin January 2011 to grant LGT £20,000 tocomplete the project within three years – aquarter of the original budget.

LCC were concerned that the English Heritage (EH)criteria for adding sites to the Register of parks andgardens of special historic interest were neithersufficiently transparent, nor suited to thedevelopment of robust local lists of parks of regionaland local importance for the 14 district and unitaryauthorities that exist in the county. Although ten siteshad been added to the 25 already on the EH Registerin 1998, data on 290 sites graded by Bennis andDyke into categories ‘A to D’, and a further 211‘Appendix’ sites, remained unused. An estimated 200omissions had not been addressed, and the data wasunreliable for development control purposes.

LGT recruited and trained a team of (currently 15)volunteers, that contributed nearly 4000 hoursvisiting all the Bennis and Dyke category A to D sites,completing pro-forma records for each, together withphotographs, archive maps, illustrations, and writtenand oral history sources.

To measure significance we first categorise sites byone of the four broad EH types – Urban, Rural,Landscape of Memory and Industrial, and then sub-group if necessary by principal date range. The aim isto compare like-with-like, as in the EH Monuments

Measuring thesignificance of HistoricDesigned Landscapes in Lancashire: LocalLists and communityinvolvement

Nigel R J Neil

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1


by members of the community. However, whenassessed under the national criteria, many of theseapplications are turned down because the site is notconsidered to have national significance, with 74%of those that refer to the local value of the site beingrejected.

TENSIONThere is now an increasingly engaged andenthusiastic public who care about their localheritage, and wish to see it protected. With the easeof applying for listing, and the apparent lack of othermethods of protection, they therefore apply fornational designation of their cherished local sites.However, as noted previously, the majority ofapplications do not result in a listing outcome. Thesesites, however, are not less significant, as is oftensuggested, but are simply significant in a differentway. Discounting this as less important is one of themajor sources of tension – so what can be done?

THE BIG SOCIETY & LOCALISMCurrent government policy is strongly focused onlocalism. Should significance thus be re-defined inthe national criteria to include a wider range of sites? Or, can we use the ‘Big Society’ programme to ensure that what communities’ value is taken more seriously through local lists? The draftLocalism Bill which is currently going throughparliament does include a policy that will requireplanning authorities to maintain a list of ‘assets ofcommunity value’, with sites being nominated by thelocal community. However, just over 50% ofplanning authorities already have a ‘local list’, yettheir current non-statutory nature means that thepublic often apply for national designation instead, orin addition. In contrast, although Conservation Areasdo carry some statutory control only 39% of the 250designation applications analysed were for buildingsalready within one.

Additionally, the localism bill has an essentialisedview of ‘local’, focusing mainly on ‘traditional’village life. The concept of ‘community’ that is usedfollows the normative ideal of something which is‘good’, ‘safe’ and ‘comfortable’’ (Smith & Waterton,2009, p13), but it should not be assumed thateveryone within a community will necessarily agreewith each other. In addition, communities are notalways ‘local’, something which does not seem tohave been considered.

As many would now agree, significance isascribed to heritage, and is not intrinsic tothe asset in question. Heritage, therefore, isnot a haphazard survival of historicbuildings and monuments, it is the outcomeof a conscious and intentional choice tocreate, maintain and preserve selectedplaces, often for a specific purpose. Assuch, there is a multi-vocality of heritagesignificance which leads to a somewhatinherent tension between local significanceand the national designation system.

This is the subject of my PhD, which I was asked topresent at the IfA Conference in Reading. Myresearch focuses on the tension resulting from a‘national’ framework of heritage designation policies,which seek to be participatory and inclusive, butwhich cannot effectively recognise the increasingimportance of ‘local’ heritage due to the restrictionsof current legislation and guidance. It asks, therefore,whether ‘national’ heritage legislation and policy isstill an effective way of ‘protecting’ valued heritagesites, or whether we should be looking to more localpolicies given the localism agenda of the 2010coalition Government.

DESIGNATION APPLICATIONSAlthough the addition of a specific building to thenational list is often the focus of heated debate, forexample the Plymouth Civic Centre, in general thedesignation of those aspects of the historicenvironment which are deemed to be of nationalsignificance is largely unquestioned. Other ways ofprotecting assets are often not considered, leading tothe general assumption that the only way to protectwhat we value, is to have it designated.

Two hundred and fifty applications for newdesignations have been analysed as part of myresearch. Almost half of these applications (44%)refer to the local significance of the site. Of these, themost common types of buildings that are applied for,other than domestic properties, are commercialbuildings (shops, pubs, etc) and culture andentertainment buildings (including libraries), withindustrial buildings also popular. This is because suchbuildings are often focal points or landmarks in thelocal area, which are well-known and used regularly

CONCLUSIONLocal community groups no longer simply supportconservation but now seek to have their own sense ofheritage acknowledged and legitimised. However, thenational designation criteria exclude large numbersof locally significant buildings. In the past these havebeen seen as less significant, resulting in a somewhatinherent tension between local value and nationaldesignation. The national lists cannot easily deal withthe need to recognise the local significance of thesesites but the localism bill does suggest a way oftaking local heritage seriously and giving people avoice.

Stella Jackson Student memberEnglish Heritage

Suggested reading

Ashworth, G J, 2002 ‘The experience of heritage conservation: outcomesand futures’ in: Ashworth, G J & Larkham, P J (eds) Building a newheritage: tourism, culture, identity in the new Europe. London: Routledge

Ashworth, G J, 2008 ‘Heritage: definitions, delusions and dissonances’ in: Amoeda, R, Lira, S, Pinheiro, C, Pinheiro, F & Pinheiro, J (eds) Worldheritage and sustainable development, Vol 1. Barcelos, Portugal: GreenLines Institute for Sustainable Development

Ashworth, G J & Phelps, A, 2002 ‘The cultural construction of heritageconservation’ in: Phelps, A, Ashworth, G J & Johansson, B O H (eds) Theconstruction of built heritage: a North European perspective on policies,practices and outcomes. Hampshire: Ashgate

Carman, J, 2002 Archaeology and heritage: an introduction. London:Continuum

Bradford Odeon, which has

had numerous designation

requests over the last few

years, all of which were

turned down. Photo: © All

rights reserved by freebird

ubx (downloaded from

Flickr via Creative

Commons License)

ASCRIBING SIGNIFICANCE IN THE‘BIG SOCIETY’

The Conservative Party

Big Society conference,

31st March 2010. Photo

by Andrew Parsons

(downloaded from Flickr

via Creative Commons

License)

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1R

EAD

ING

20

11

Stella Jackson


The first paper from Ed Pollard, ORCA Marine and ArchaeologyDepartment and Niall Brady, Discovery Programme, Dublin, consideredpast work in Ireland in both high and low energy zones, highlightingDrogheda and the Boyne estuary as a case study of archaeology anddevelopment in an Irish maritime context.

Caroline Wickham-Jones of the University of Aberdeen, outlined howmost underwater archaeology work has tended to focus on low energysites as these are easier to access and there is an expectation that moremaritime archaeology will survive. In contrast, Orkney waters have a lotof high energy, rocky sites which require investigation. This is becomingespecially important considering the development of the marine energyrenewables in these areas.

Paul Sharman of ORCA and the Department of Archaeology, UHI,continued with an examination of the situation in Scotland where newmarine planning, licensing and Marine Protected Area (MPA) powers arenow in force. One of the major challenges is increasing awareness of therequirement to consider the significance of the marine historicenvironment.

Philip Robertson of Historic Scotland, outlined their role within theplanning process in Scotland. Historic Scotland is responsible for theseabed out to the 200 nautical miles limit but cannot designate beyond

This year’s maritime session had a distinctly northern British slant, in contrast to previous years, with projectexamples from Northern Ireland and Scotland playing a prominent part. It was also different in that it wasnot organised by the IfA’s Maritime Affairs Group, which is normally the case. The session focused on issuesand best practice examples relating to the assessment of significance of underwater assets.

the territorial limit of 12 nautical miles. However,Scottish ministers do have such devolved powers.

Tony Firth of Wessex Archaeology finished thesession with a detailed discussion of the criteria usedto define ‘significance’ by the Coastal and Marinesection at Wessex Archaeology. He concluded thatthere is no direct comparison between international,national and local significance and that we shouldinstead think of them as different dimensions.

The world of underwater archaeology is exciting andis a world where new contributions are still possible.However, it is the archaeologist’s responsibility toensure good management of the archaeologicalresource as the exploitation and development of theseabed increases in intensity. The fact that this is stillan area where the principals of good practice arebeing tried and tested only increases the value ofsessions such as this, which offer practitioners theopportunity to get together and exchange experience.

Mark Littlewood AIfAIfA MAG Committee

There is still afundamentallack ofknowledge ofwhat historicenvironmentassets surviveand where inScottishwaters.

Wreck inspection

© University of Aberdeen

ASSESSING SIGNIFICANCE UNDERWATER: just piles of old rocks, geophysical anomalies and shifting sands?

Evaluating Significance in the Commercial Sector:Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) off the Coast of Scotland

on the importance of shipwrecks and prehistoric landsurfaces and deposits have helped to standardiseapproaches, although in Scotland the development ofcriteria of significance and relative importance isonly in a pre-consultation draft phase.

Unfortunately, there is no statutory definition of‘significance’ (often used as a synonym for‘importance’) or what is ‘significant’, yet legislationand guidance constantly refers to significant effectsand impacts on sites of significance, as in The MarineWorks (EIA) Regulations (Schedule 1,Clause 2 (c) (ix)). The Government’s2011 UK Marine Policy Statementsection 2.6.6 on the HistoricEnvironment uses the word‘significance’ ten times in just over apage, but provides a rather vaguedefinition.

All of this has consequences forhow, during the comparatively shortperiod allotted to the production ofan EIA, we can satisfactorily identifywhat exists and where, and gatherenough evidence to evaluate how toproceed, with the certainty adeveloper may require for riskreduction and elimination.According to the Marine Works (EIA)Regulations and the Marine (Scotland) Act, this has tobe within a framework of what is a reasonable levelof effort and expenditure for the developer to make.

One outcome may be that extra significance isallotted to anomalies, submerged landscapes anddeposits simply because they are underwater. There isa tendency to avoid anything that could requirefurther time and expense in more targeted evaluationwork, even though the targets may prove to be ofnegligible significance. This is a rapidly changingfield in terms of methodologies and statutoryrequirements and although not necessarily desirablefor the developer, the over-protection of the marinehistoric environment may be preferable in themeantime.

Paul Sharman Senior Project OfficerOrkney Research Centre for Archaeology

In Scottish waters, the number of proposedmarine developments, from gas pipelines to wind farms, from tidal devices to fishfarms, is increasing rapidly - especially in the renewable energy sector. Suchdevelopments are being brought within a planning-style control system by way ofprovisions in legislation such as The Marine Works (Environmental ImpactAssessment) Regulations 2007 and theMarine (Scotland) Act 2010.

Marine spatial plans, at national and regional/locallevels, are currently under development. They aremeant to identify opportunities and constraints andlay out integrated and sustainable management of themarine and coastal areas. The effect is to identifyareas more likely to be appropriate for use, focusingdevelopers’ attention and the speed of development,before all environmental data is gathered and fullyintegrated plans are finalised. There is still afundamental lack of knowledge of what and wherehistoric environment assets survive in Scottish waters,yet the Crown Estate has already licensed many areasfor renewable energy developments.

As a result, it often falls to the EIA process to identifyand evaluate the significance of elements in themarine historic environment that may be affected.However, despite legislation and guidance, membersof some authorities, developers and even environmentalconsultancy companies remain unaware of therequirement to consider the historic environment.

However, the situation is constantly improving with agrowing body of developer guidance taking effect,especially material produced for COWRIE and theCrown Estate concerning the range of work necessaryto identify the baseline. However, this is still onlyguidance and not part of the licensing regime.

The purpose of an EIA is to ensure that the authoritygiving the primary consent for a particular projectmakes its decision in the knowledge of any likelysignificant effects on the environment. Mitigation andmanagement must be predicated on both thesignificance of impact and that which is impacted.Guidance criteria from ALSF and EH funded projects

ORCA monitoring cable

landfall at Skaill Bay,

Orkney © ORCA

Mark Littlewood Paul Sharman REA

DIN

G 2

01

1R

EAD

ING

20

11

22 T h e A r c h a e o l o g i s t A u t u m n 2 0 1 1 N u m b e r 8 1

Lovely – but what is it? The Rising Tide Project and research on the submerged landscape of Orkney

The Bay of Firth © University of Aberdeen

high frequency sonar surveys, diving, coring, fieldwalking of the inter-tidal zone, aerial photography,and archive work.

As a result, it has been possible to construct a pictureof the influx of water into the bay in the periodbetween 5000–1000 BC. A variety of anomalies havebeen recorded by remote sensing and divingexaminations have taken place on the principal sites.Nevertheless, it is still difficult to interpret the variousanomalies, and characterisation is currently restrictedto descriptive terms: mounds; isolated stones andstone settings; linear features; and modern. Work inthe inter-tidal zone is helping us to understand theprocesses of site formation and decay as structuresmake the transition from land to sea.

In this respect the assessment of significance for anarchaeological site underwater has to includeinformation on context and landscape as much as forany site on land, the difference being that preciseinformation relating to the past sea-level history ofmost of Scotland has yet to be drawn up.

Caroline Wickham-Jones MIfA University of [email protected]

The Rising Tide Project is aninterdisciplinary, multi-institutional project,set up in 2005 to investigate Holocenerelative sea-level change and the potentialof the submerged landscape aroundOrkney. At the end of the last glacial periodand into the start of the Holocene relativesea-level may have been some 40 metreslower than today, and dates from sedimentcores indicate that present height was onlyreached around 2000 BC. Given theshallow waters around the islands, asubstantial submerged landscape isindicated, with the possibility of both aMesolithic and a Neolithic signature.

In addition to work to build a sea-level curve, therecent focus of the project has been on the Bay ofFirth at the heart of the archipelago. Attention wasdrawn to the bay because of its strong ethno-archaeological record, including stories relating topossible submerged archaeological remains,furthermore the bay offers classic sheltered conditionsconducive to the survival of sites after inundation.Fieldwork combines a variety of techniques including

Bay of Firth_bathycorrected to OD2010. Crown copyright

Caroline Wickham-Jones

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1


Following the announcement that the nextIfA conference would take partnershipworking as its core theme, this session wasin the vanguard. Hopefully some of theideas and examples discussed at thissession will be drawn through into 2012.The session itself was created by SusanCasey, RCAHMS and Jeff Sanders, Societyof Antiquaries of Scotland to provide aforum for discussing experiences ofworking in partnership and to shareinspirational case studies, as well as lessonslearned. With an emphasis on thought-provoking and punchy papers, MartinCarver (editor, Antiquity) set the tone aschair, asking how we can improve theresearch dividend of what is done in thename of archaeology. Taking up thatchallenge were a number of speakers whomanaged to deliver stimulating, challengingand at times provocative papers.

Joe Flatman, UCL/Surrey County Council, openedproceedings with a consideration of opportunitiesarchaeology could take, particularly in respect tohow academia and local government could workbetter in partnership. He highlighted some of theproblems that archaeology in Britain faces in terms ofcross-sectoral working, as well as some of the likelylong-term impacts on the practice of archaeology,including the issue of how archaeology might be

undertaken domestically and internationally in afuture low carbon economy. Al Oswald, EnglishHeritage, then provided a specific case study fromthe North Pennines of a project with well-establishedpartnerships. Peter McKeague, RCAHMS, highlightedthe efficiency of data being created once and thenshared, exploring this through the INSPIRE directive.Dave Thomas RCAHMW then explored the SWISH(Shared Web Information Services for Heritage)partnership between Scotland and Wales – outliningthe challenges, and the benefits of overcoming them.

Melissa Strauss, Heritage Lottery Fund, gave theperspective from a funder’s viewpoint, outlining how the HLF views the principles and practicalities of collaboration. Neil Rushton,Churches Conservation Trust, then described a series of case studies showing how redundantAnglican churches could be regenerated ascommunity assets through partnerships – including a short video on All Souls Church, Bolton(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5gltaYUkjs).

Victoria Hunns, Natural England, exploredpartnerships with Natural England and DEFRA,highlighting the importance of agri-environmentschemes and the need for archaeology to adapt toworking cultures in this area to reap rewards. DonHenson, CBA, brought the talks to a fittingconclusion with lessons learned from the YorkshireDales – developing links between people, andremembering that archaeology can be fun.

Lively discussion ensued, ranging from fundingregimes to harnessing social media, from educationto environmental change, and from stewardship ofthe land to the social benefits of heritage. There werelots of ideas about how to improve the researchdividend of what is done in the name of archaeology,and examples of many already being done. Judgingby the discussion, the next IfA Conference should bea dynamic one.

Dr Jeff SandersSociety of Antiquaries of Scotland

Susan Casey AIfARCAHMS

AREN’T WE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER? The importance of partnership working

SWISH © Martin Newman

indeed to use the historic environment to help build a sense of community throughout the area.

In addition to these partnerships English Heritage has forged very productive links with two othergovernment agencies: the Environment Agency andNatural England. With a responsibility to understandand address factors affecting water quality (the Nentbeing England’s most contaminated river, largely dueto the region’s mining history), the EnvironmentAgency is keen to benefit from the detailedunderstanding of water sources and distorted flowpatterns that the study of the area’s extensive andprolonged industrial and agricultural exploitation isrevealing. As part of its contribution to the project,the Environment Agency is sharing its detailed dataon contamination and water flow, which has animportant bearing on understanding how water hasbeen harnessed and how erosion of archaeologicalsites can be addressed. For once, archaeologicalmonuments – often the threatened resource – arethemselves the threats, and need to be managedsensitively, especially with regard to fluvial erosion.

Natural England are keen to develop theirunderstanding of the designated plant communitiesthat inhabit the uplands, including some which havedeveloped specifically in response to themetalliferous conditions. Similarly, the vast raisedpeat bogs are well understood to be aninternationally important natural resource (notablywith reference to their carbon storage capacity). Thedamaging effects of ‘peat gripping’ to improvedrainage for agricultural improvement over recentdecades have been investigated through the AONBAuthority’s ongoing ‘Peatscapes’ project and potentialsolutions implemented. However, the impacts of theprolonged extraction to provide industrial (as well asdomestic) fuel in the past are very poorly understood.Natural England’s contribution to the Miner-FarmerLandscapes project recognises the potential value ofarchaeological research to the sensitive managementof ecology. In turn, through that organisation’s HigherLevel Stewardship scheme, key archaeological siteslike the extraordinarily well-preserved Roman fortknown as Whitley Castle are benefiting fromenhanced access, interpretation and protection.

Alastair Oswald, Senior Archaeological Investigator, English Heritage

In 2005, English Heritage signed a ‘JointAccord’ which pledged the organisation towork closely with AONB authorities, as wellas other partners, to help further shared aimsof understanding, caring for, valuing andenjoying the historic environment. Thisagreement, which cemented a more than adecade of partnership working with ProtectedLandscapes, has given rise to a number ofmajor research and conservation projects, ofwhich the current ‘Miner-Farmer Landscapesof the North Pennines AONB’ project, due tocontinue until 2012, is one of the mostambitious and successful to date.

Beneath the over-arching partnership between English Heritage and the AONB authority sit otherpartnerships: with Birmingham University’s VistaSpatial and Technology Unit, who tenderedsuccessfully to explore the potential of the remotely-sensed datasets specially acquired for the project(including Lidar, digital RGB, colour infra-red andmulti-spectral vertical aerial photography); with thelocal community through the vehicles of the AlstonMoor Historical Society and the North PenninesHeritage Trust, and with the commercial sector in theform of North Pennines Archaeology Ltd. Basedwithin the project area, North Pennines ArchaeologyLtd has undertaken a portion of the rapid analyticalfield survey of this intensively exploited yet littleunderstood landscape. They bring with them theirown local expertise and all the benefits of establishedclose links with the local mining fraternity. Thiscomponent of the project, constructed around aformal programme of mentoring and on-going qualityassurance, was designed to build the commercialsector’s capacity to carry out a form of archaeologicalinvestigation rarely practiced to a high standard dueto falling outside the scope of planning interventions.

The Miner-Farmer Landscapes project has also been atouchstone for the AONB Authority’s development ofa second major project, funded largely by theHeritage Lottery Fund, called ‘AltogetherArchaeology’. The aim of this project is moreexplicitly to encourage participation in archaeologyand conservation among the widely scatteredinhabitants of this 2000 square kilometre massif, and

The experience of partnership working: English Heritage’s current ‘Miner-Farmer landscapes of the North Pennines AONB’ project

Dr JeffSandersand SusanCasey

Alastair Oswald

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1R

EAD

ING

20

11

... the current‘Miner-FarmerLandscapes ofthe NorthPenninesAONB’ project,due to continueuntil 2012, isone of the mostambitious andsuccessful todate.


BUSINESS PLANNING

A business plan should be a live document and assuch, should be updated regularly. The plan shouldn’tbe longer than it needs to be, but should consider thefollowing points

• goals and aims• the market opportunity• strategy to achieve goals and aims• marketing plan• Operations, Productivity, ICT & Systems• people & Skills• Financial & Legal (including health and safety)• financial forecasts

FINANCE

Once the plan is in place, it should become clear towhat degree finance is required. Once this has beenascertained, the following could be considered togain adequate financing

• can family or friends help with financing thebusiness?

• develop a good relationship with your businessbank manager

• shop around if necessary• manage your finances and ensure cash flow is

maintained• report your accounts regularly

MARKETING

Now you’re in operation, but how do you get yourbusiness known?

• Marketing for a small business is about beingvisible to your customers.

• Marketing starts with understanding yourcustomers. This helps you know how, when andwhy they buy. It helps you find ways tocommunicate and stay in contact with them.

• Marketing can be as simple as identifying thecustomer you need to speak to and buying them abeer!

• Tendering for business is also important in yourindustry. Consider hiring a freelance bid writer ifnecessary.

• What makes you different from and better thanyour competition?

Towergate Insurance were once againdelighted to be involved with the IfAconference, and for the first time delivereda business seminar to add real value fordelegates. This year, the theme of ourseminar was ‘Business Start-ups’.Considering the economic challenges thatarchaeologists currently face, the sessionlooked at ‘how to set up in business’, ‘howto run a business’ and ‘how to manage yourrisks’. What follows is a brief overview ofthe topics that were covered in our session.

TYPES OF LEGAL STRUCTURE

Perhaps the first thing to consider once you’vedecided to set up in business is that your legalstructure should match the scale of your operation.We discussed the merits of the following structures

• sole trader• partnership• Limited Liability Partnership (LLP)• limited company• charitable incorporated organisations

MARKET RESEARCH

Market research may not be so valid to the typicalarchaeologist, but when it comes to buying andselling services, it never hurts to know more aboutyour potential customers and their buyingbehaviours. In this segment we discussed

• market factors• market positioning• customer’s needs and buying behaviour• market trends and competitors• consider joint ventures with other companies to

offer a wider range of services

TRAINING & SKILLS

We then considered how running your own businessrequires you to gain a different set of skills andknowledge than what you’re probably used to. Thesecan include

• financial management• marketing/sales skills• ICT• health and safety

Search online for training providers local to you. Ifyou are being made redundant, you may be able toaccess funding for re-training through yourredundancy package or local Jobcentre Plus.

HEALTH & SAFETY / RISK MANAGEMENT

This section considered Duty of Care – to yourself,those you work with and anybody else that may beaffected by your business’ activities (e.g. the generalpublic walking past a dig site). When you run yourown business, you are responsible for this.

You are also responsible for office / laboratory healthand safety, e.g. computer workstation ergonomicsand eyestrain, slip, trip and fall hazards, PAT testing,fire safety, COSHH and first aid.

LIABILITY

Sole traders and partners are personally liable for thedebts of their business, but partners may also beliable for other partners’ debts! The organisation’sliability is generally limited unless personalguarantees have been given; however, directors’liability is unlimited.

Health and safety can also help to retain staff, reduceabsence and sick leave, maintains your reputation,and keeps insurance and legal costs down.Prevention, therefore, is far better than cure!

The key message delivered was to understand therisks your business faces and learn to manage them.If you are financially dependent on one keycustomer, for example, but also your operational riskssuch as health and safety.

If you would like to find out more on the above, we can provide a copy of the handout from ourpresentation by post or e-mail. In addition, if yourequire any guidance on insuring your business,please give the team a call on 0844 892 1638 or e-mail [email protected]

David CawdearyTowergate Risk Solutions

David CawdearySELF-EMPLOYMENT AND BUSINESS START-UPSR

EAD

ING

20

11

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1


• whether the significance of the assets could bedetermined

• what tools could be used to determine significance• what further works might be required to clarify the

significance of heritage assets present • what level of report would be appropriate

The cases were chosen to illustrate a wide range ofissues, non-listed but locally important buildings,development within a scheduled monument,development on a registered battlefield anddevelopment within a conservation area.

A lively discussion followed which illustrated thatwhile there is good understanding of the approach setout in PPS5, there is also a wide range of opinionsabout the level of work required on a specific site.One of the key challenges ahead will be to ensurethat the level of assessment undertaken is appropriateand is properly informed by the level of significanceof the heritage asset. It is also clear that dialogue withthe local curatorial authority is fundamental toensuring that any assessment undertaken meets theneeds of the local planning authority.

The positive atmosphere and the willingness of allparticipants to join in with the debate were especiallypleasing. While no firm conclusions on the issues canbe drawn from the workshop it is clear that theprofession is thinking about this matter in aconstructive way.

Duncan Coe MIfAArchaeological OfficerWest Berkshire Council

It seemed fitting that at a conference where the emphasiswas so much on ‘significance’ that a session should focuson the thorny issue of preparing PPS5 compliant reports. Itwas decided early on that as it is still early days for PPS5and that we are still feeling our way through many of itsrequirements that the workshop should do what it says onthe tin; seek to engage participants in a proper dialogueabout the issues.

Duncan McCallum, Government Advice Director, English Heritage, gavea short account of the drafting of PPS5, setting out the principles thatunderpin the approach and explaining some of the outcomes expected.He also gave his view on the current discussions about the expected newNational Planning Framework and on an upbeat note said that he thoughtthat the key principles of PPS5 would be retained.

Duncan Coe, Archaeological Officer, West Berkshire Council,summarised what he thought the role of significance would play in theplanning process and why the concept of significance would lead to morerobust decision making.

Participants were split into groups of 7-8 and the workshop was dividedinto two sessions. The first session focused on the use of the EnglishHeritage Conservation Principles as a tool for defining and understandingsignificance. Each group was given a heritage asset and asked to consider

• what the different components of the heritage asset might be• to list the different significances• to consider whether the Conservation Principles can be used to define

significance• to suggest how the heritage significance can best be articulated

There were mixed views on the applicability of the approach set out inConservation Principles and the differences in terminology between it andthe PPS were seen as problematic. On the whole it was recognised thatthere remains no common standard for articulating significance and thiswill be an issue for the sector to address if a consistent approach to PPS5is going to be adopted. What was clearly appreciated was just howcomplex individual heritage assets can be, both in terms of their physicalfabric and setting, but also in the in the way they are viewed and valuedby different and diverse groups and communities.

The second part of the workshop looked at what PPS5 seeks fromapplicants as a ‘description of the significance of the heritage assets’ andthe ‘assessment of the impact’ on the significances identified.

• The groups were given a series of real planning cases and asked toconsider

• what heritage assets were present

Publication and dissemination of data are tough issues for archaeologists today.What should we be printing and how?What and how should we publish by othermeans? Can we make grey literature into a more useful product? How can we fulfilour duty to make a permanent record ofexcavation results whilst getting essentialinformation across to a wide audience in a digestible way?

Alison Taylor looked at how the last 20 years haveprovided archaeologists with a massive data bank,new technology to publish, disseminate and search it, cheap print and online facilities, cheap colourillustration, good distribution networks and an eageraudience – yet overall outcomes for academicknowledge are disappointing. The need for bothphysical and intellectual accessibility wasemphasised, with searchability through standardsearch engines seen as the ideal way ahead.

Kasia Gdaniec concentrated on the post-excavationassessment phase – how we should assess raw data,make decisions on how to treat them and what morework they deserve, what we should print ordisseminate in other ways in order to make greyliterature a more useful product. Is further adviceneeded to make the processes of assessment andpublication easier and less resource-intensive for bothcontractors and curators and produce more usefulresults?

Jenny Glazebrook, looking at the process from aneditor’s viewpoint, emphasised the value of readersknowing immediately whether a report was relevantto their own researches, and being able to find dataeasily. Basics such as clear structure supported by agood abstract, proper signposting, strong correlationbetween text and illustrations, internal consistency,plain but stimulating prose, expert interpretation andoriginal thought are still essential whatever themedium.

Discussion was important in this session. Despite thewish for strong narrative in reports, there weresupporters and detractors for a generally syntheticapproach. There was agreement however that the aimfor sites with significant results should be to have fullsupporting evidence accessible online and be

properly signposted within a shorter analytical hard-copy publication. Grey literature is most valuableonline, although there will often be requirements for hard copy. We were reminded of the CBAPublication User Needs Survey (PUNS) published in 2001, which recommended that detailed evidencebe available online, allowing archaeologists toconcentrate on producing more accessible reportswith strong storylines, and we recommended that thisapproach be revived and re-visited. Other specificrecommendations that gained general support were

• Abstracts and Conclusions, the most crucial partsof each report (and often all that is read) neededmore care and guidance over their preparation

• standard terminologies should be agreed anduniversally adopted

• all grey literature must be rapidly availablethrough OASIS, perhaps using a simpler systemwith less emphasis on validation and more onsearchability

• IfA should purchase institutional subscription toonline academic journals, providing free access as a benefit of membership

Alison Taylor(then) Editor, [email protected]

Jenny GlazebrookEditor, East Anglian [email protected]

Kasia GdaniecCambridgeshire County [email protected]

Essential writing skills for archaeologistsKasia Gdaniec, Jenny Glazebrook and Alison Taylor

Assessing significance for planning applications: preparing PPS5 – compliant reports for local authorities Duncan Coe

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1How can we fulfil our duty to make a permanent recordof excavation results whilstgetting essential informationacross to a wide audiencein a digestible way?

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1

31A u t u m n 2 0 1 1 N u m b e r 8 1

The conference has a reputation forattracting mostly senior established figuresin the profession. This isn’t the casehowever, as three of this year’s attendeesfound when they came to Conference forthe first time.

Nathalie Ward PIfAIfA Bursary Holder, Heritage at Risk Officer,Northumberland National Park

In a time when there appear to be feweropportunities and increasing pressures on availablefunding, new graduates can struggle to make a startin the profession. The IfA Conference presents aunique opportunity to gain knowledge andunderstanding of the sector, acquire new skills, meetother people in the same situation and those in theprofession who can offer advice and guidance basedon their years of experience.

The series of workshops that occurred across thethree days of the conference proved extremely useful,and could prove likewise to other professionals. Thisyear’s selection included introductions to thePlanning System, MoRPHE project management, theimplications of PPS5, writing skills for archaeologistsand self-employment and business start-ups. As ayoung practitioner, and as an IfA bursary holder, Irecognise the importance of the conference for allarchaeologists, but particularly the youngergeneration, who I encourage to attend to developtheir skills, improve their CVs and connect with andlearn from other members of the profession. After all,we are the future of the profession and as one of thesessions asked ‘aren’t we all in this together?’

Edward James Student member

I was excited to attend my first IfA Conference inReading this year and was lucky enough that abursary from IfA made it possible. I had severalmotivations for attending. I wanted to meet peoplewho work within the sector, especially those who arepro-active enough to attend the conference, and dosome networking with a view to future employment. Ifelt the central theme ‘Understanding Significance’was likely to engender engaging debate, and I was

very interested in the discussion topics, particularlythe future of planning and the historic environment.The CPD sessions also attracted me, as I’ve had littleexperience of this to-date. Finally, there was ofcourse the social aspect of the conference and I waslooking forward to meeting and chatting to some like-minded people, both of my own age and older, in aless formal atmosphere. I wasn’t disappointed, andthoroughly enjoyed my three days in Reading.

Understanding SignificanceThe key theme emerged early and questions at theopening address revolved around the uncertainty ofthe current economic climate, what the roles of theIfA, CBA, FAME and other organisations should be,and how the understanding of significance shouldplay a crucial role within the sector. I was particularlypleased to hear questions about the level of graduateunemployment and pay and conditions. DuncanBrown, Head of Archives at English Heritage, askedthe panel what they thought ‘archaeology’ was and itwas interesting to hear the different answers eachpanel member gave.

I attended the ‘Southport Group: towards arevitalisation of the planning process’ session. I aminterested in this area, and wanted to enhance myunderstanding of how the system is changing in thelight of PPS5, and what the heritage sector’s responsemight be. There was an interesting presentation byKath Scanlan from the LSE emphasising the necessityfor commercial archaeology to be economically viable and create a niche for itself within thedevelopment market. The Southport Group’s report was then presented in sections, and the audiencecould vote on each section using red and greenpostcards. Despite some hesitations I took a positivemessage from the session, which seemed to convey a coherent idea of the way forward. I look forward to reading the final report, and hopefully seeing some of its recommendations in action.

On Thursday morning I attended a CPD workshopby IfA’s Kate Geary, and Kenneth Aitchison ofLandward Research Ltd. This was very useful as Ihave only just graduated, and it helped me clarifythe direction I want to take and the steps needed toachieve professional standards. This is an importantpart of starting any career, and I am pleased that IfAmakes CPD mandatory. The session also highlightedthe potential gap between ideal level of training

IfA CONFERENCE – the next generationNathalie Ward, Edward James and Holly Beavitt-Pike

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1

I felt the central theme‘UnderstandingSignificance’was likely toengenderengagingdebate, and Iwas veryinterested in the discussiontopics,particularly the future ofplanning andthe historicenvironment.


working in the commercial sector, and from thewebsite Arch Points. Archaeology South East runstraining excavations for students in the UK and inPalestine. It operates a funded CPD programme forstaff, and has created five in-house training programson topics such as Roman Pottery and Archaeobotanyin response to skills shortages identified in IfA labourmarket intelligence reports. Arch Points operatesthrough Facebook and is the largest archaeologyresource on the site. Each day one of the three personteam makes a posting to the site with a tip, fact, itemof legislation, safety warning or other useful bit ofinformation to aid archaeologists in their work. Over2900 friends across the world follow and respond tothese postings.

Such examples illustrate the diversity and originalityof approaches to professional development that theATF seeks to recognise through the award.

The ATF works to promote the value of trainingthroughout the archaeology sector in both professionaland voluntary contexts. Through its partners, it hasconducted surveys of training provision, worked withthe Sector Skills Councils to create the NationalOccupational Standards and the National VocationalQualifications in Archaeological Practice andsupported the development of placement schemessuch as the EPPIC placements administered by the IfA.The ATF also administers a bursary scheme funded byEnglish Heritage to support individuals attending ATFrecognised training courses.

A call for applications to the ATF Training Award for2012 will appear in September. The closing date will be 31 January 2012, and the winner will bepresented with their award at the IfA AnnualConference in April 2012. The ATF is keen to seeentries from the professional and voluntary sectors, as well as the nomination of individuals who havemade a significant contribution to the training ofothers. Detailed guidelines, and an application form will be available from the ATF website(www.britarch.ac.uk/training/atf.html).

Anthony SinclairChair, Archaeology Training Forum

Kate Geary MIfAStandards Development Manager, IfA

The first Archaeology Training Forum (ATF)Training Award was made to the NauticalArchaeology Society (NAS) at this year’s IfAConference. Mary Harvey, TrainingManager at the NAS picked up the awardfrom Dr Mike Heyworth, Chair of the ATF.

The ATF Training Award is an annual prize. It is opento entries from archaeological organisations,individuals, partnerships and projects; both voluntaryand professional from within the United Kingdom.Entries are judged by a panel of representatives fromEnglish Heritage, Historic Scotland, the Institute forArchaeologists, the Higher Education Academy andthe Council for British Archaeology. Award entriesmust demonstrate their commitment to CPD, and torecognised professional standards and ethics. Theymust also demonstrate clear benefits extendingbeyond the individual organisation and show aninnovative approach or the development of bestpractice.

In presenting this year’s award, Mike Heyworthstated, ‘The Nautical Archaeology Society was aworthy winner of the inaugural ATF Training Award.The NAS stood out for its strategic approach and longterm commitment to training, delivered through anestablished and internationally recognised programmewhich is coherent, well-structured and tested, aimedat both professional and amateur sectors’.

NAS is a charitable organisation aiming to promotethe study and preservation of maritime heritage bothin the UK and overseas. It has been actively involvedin training within the archaeology sector since 1991and today runs a range of courses focused on theskills of underwater and foreshore archaeology aswell as the fundamental principles and theoreticalparameters of maritime archaeology. Its trainingcurriculum includes three Certificates and a Diploma.Certificate course-work is aligned with NationalOccupational Standards in Archaeological Practice,and is suitable for those undertaking the NationalVocational Qualifications at level 3 or 4. The TrainingProgramme is internationally recognised and operatesin several countries.

In judging this year’s award, the ATF panel alsocommended entries from Archaeology South East

In recognition of Professional DevelopmentAnthony Sinclair and Kate Geary

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1


difference between academic and commercialarchaeology was raised, leading to discussion on howthis gap can be bridged more effectively from bothsides in the future. By the end of the afternoon I hadseen some interesting and encouraging presentationsand felt that I had learned a good deal about howpartnership working can benefit the archaeologicalsector.

Friday’s session options included training, communityarchaeology, an overview of the ‘Best of BritishArchaeology’, and developing digital visualisation. Idecided to attend the community archaeologysession because I am keen to get involved in this areaand feel that increasing public awareness ofarchaeology is of fundamental importance. As PeterHinton suggested, ideally there should only be‘archaeology’ and what is now called ‘communityarchaeology’ should be automatically included. Therewere some engaging presentations in this session,with smaller but good examples from Surrey andTelford, and then an example of large scalecommunity involvement at the East Kent Access Roadexcavations. There were important questions askedabout the practicalities of ‘getting people involved’and how to attract a more diverse ethnic audience,with the associated equality and diversity issueswhich can be encountered within archaeology. Thiswas my favourite session, and it has inspired me toinvestigate how I can contribute to my localcommunity’s voluntary heritage sector, and get moreinvolved with organisations such as YAC and mylocal archaeology group.

provided, and training actually undertaken. As aninexperienced member of the sector, I think it

is vital that people in my position push formore training in order to reach their potential,

and also benefit their employers. I wasdisappointed that so few people attended the

session, and I hope that this reflects that CPD andPDPs are well understood and practiced within thesector, rather than a lack of interest.

I then attended the second half of ‘Understandingand protection: the application of significance in thehistoric environment and the National HeritageProtection Plan’. The debate was an interesting one.The disparity between ‘local significance’ and‘national importance’ was discussed alongside otherissues, with consideration given to how applicationof significance fits in with ‘localism’ and ‘Big Society’concepts. It is reassuring that accounting for theperspective of local communities is a central tenet ofPPS5 and I hope it remains so.

Thursday afternoon’s session was on the importanceof Partnership Working. There were interesting paperson the relationship between Local Government andacademia, the INSPIRE directive, the SWISHpartnership and some other case studies of successfulpartnership working within archaeology. Thepartnership session prompted interesting andsometimes heated discussion, illustrating clearly thediversity of opinion within the archaeologicalcommunity. I enjoyed it because I was able to getinvolved and ask some questions. The perceived

The conference covered a diverse range of subjects,and raised a number of important questions: how canwe better quantify significance, and relate it tomanaging the historic environment from a planningand legislative perspective? What can be done toraise awareness and get more people involved at acommunity level within commercial archaeology?What will the role of the ‘Big Society’ be, and will anincrease in the number of volunteers have a positiveeffect on archaeology? How can the sector continueto operate in the face of budget cuts, and how canwe work together as an industry more effectively tocombat their effects? What can be done about thelevel of graduate unemployment in the sector, and apossible lack of training opportunities? Suchquestions pose challenges to the sector, which I lookforward to working with others to meet.

Concluding thoughtsThe conference was a fantastic opportunity to networkand make contacts which have already proven to begreat sources of information, advice, support andfriendship. I found the formal sessions engaging andthought provoking, and the social events vibrant andextremely good fun. I was especially delighted at thewelcome and support that I and other youngerattendees were given by older Institute members. If youare a young archaeologist and you are looking tonetwork and get involved then I highly recommendattending the conference in the future.

Holly Beavitt-Pike PIfAIfA Bursary Holder, Heritage at Risk Officer,RCAHMS

I attended the IfA conference for the first time thisyear and found it to be useful and thought-provoking,particularly the session on ‘Training: promoting bestpractice’. As a result, I felt compelled to voice myconcerns and opinions about the problems faced byarchaeology in the UK from my perspective as arecent graduate and heritage sector employee.

There appears to be a potential crisis deriving from alarge number of senior professionals approachingretirement, and a lack of opportunities andappropriate training for graduates hoping to start outin archaeology. The result is an ever-widening skillsgap. It is imperative that knowledge and skills arepassed down from the experienced to theinexperienced, and a profession with a shortfall at themore experienced end of the career scale would beone risking a significant decline in standards.

The emergence of a skills gap coincides with ashake-up of the university tuition fee system, which is

likely to reduce the number of graduates willing topay up to £27,000 in fees to enter what hasconsistently been the lowest paid graduate career. Aprofession with a shortfall at both ends of theexperience scale is at risk of disappearing entirely.

Fortunately, these problems have been acknowledgedand attempts are being made to create opportunitiesand alternative training methods for a new generationof professionals. These aim to bridge the emergingskills gap by introducing new formats of early careertraining, recognising that the profession should offergreater support for those wanting to follow a moredirect route into practical archaeology. This wasdiscussed in the training session, which outlined theimportance of continuing the workplace learningprogramme, was originally set up in 2006 andfunded by the Heritage Lottery Fund.

Workplace learning bursaries prepare individuals tobecome skilled professionals by providing structuredwork placements. The programme has enabledplacement holders to gain skills and expertise inareas where skills gaps have been identified, as wellas looking at ways to address the future challengesthat the historic environment sector might face. Theintroduction of the NVQ in Archaeological Practicehas enabled appropriately recorded and accreditedon-the-job training. I feel strongly that we needadditional opportunities offering structured trainingand financial support or the deficit of heritageprofessionals will continue and worsen.

As a recent graduate I can confirm that many newgraduates believe that an archaeological degreeequals automatic entry into an archaeology career.Graduate unemployment statistics suggest that this isnot the case. While I enjoyed the universityexperience and developed transferable skillsnecessary for a future career, it concerns me that alarge part of my degree was not relevant to acquiringor holding onto a skilled, paid job within thearchaeological profession. Instead, the series of workplacements that I personally arranged have enabledme to do this.

While the academic route should still be available, Isuggest that there is a need for people considering acareer in archaeology to develop ‘employabilityskills’ if the profession is to continue. I passionatelybelieve that there should be a wider range ofopportunities to inspire young people who have aninterest in archaeology to begin, remain within andsucceed professionally. Archaeology should open itsdoors to a wider intake of interested young peopleand embrace new forms of training to bridge theskills gap.

Andrea Bradley

(front, centre) with

IfA bursary holders

at the conference.

Photo: Alison Taylor

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1R

EAD

ING

20

11

Volunteers sorting medieval tiles © Surrey County Council


Archaeological Unit (the Preston Hawe ExcavationArchive project and the Merstham InterpretationBoard project both in East Surrey), as a way ofbringing together local communities to increaseaudiences and participation in local archaeology.Both sites contained medieval moats now surroundedby 20th century social housing estates, and were littleknown or understood by their local communities. Theareas scored very highly on the Index of MultipleDeprivation. Through a variety of non-invasivearchaeological activities (historic landscape analysis,study of previous excavation archives, historicalrecords, and archaeological finds analysis), groupsfrom a variety of socio-economic backgrounds,including excluded school pupils, were broughttogether on the projects and interacted in socialsettings they were unlikely to encounter in their dailylife.

Building on this theme, David Crawford-White ofOxford Wessex Archaeology and Simon Mason ofKent County Council discussed the communityengagement side of one of the largest archaeologicalprojects of recent years; the East Kent Access Road.The community archaeology programme was writteninto the contract and project designed from the

This conference session looked at the role of the planningprocess and in particular PPS5 in developing and enablingcommunity archaeology projects. Organised by AustinAinsworth, formerly of Gloucester City Council, and chairedby Michael Nevell, the aim of the session was to explore thetheoretical background to archaeological engagement,especially with groups at risk of social exclusion, to assessthe current level of engagement with such groups and tohighlight best practice case-studies and methodologies inexploring equality and diversity issues in communityarchaeology.

Suzie Thomas, CBA, started the session by looking at ways of increasingthe diversity of those participating in archaeology. She looked at severalschemes including the Museums Association’s Diversify scheme thatoffered post-graduate bursaries to Black and Minority Ethnic (BME)candidates. It was apparent, however, that the notion of diversity here wasconnected almost exclusively with ethnicity, with much less attentionbeing given to other, perhaps less visible types of diversity, such as socio-economic or disability backgrounds. The archaeological sector hassometimes been slower in diversifying its audiences despite the existenceof positive models such as Gloucester City Council’s Heritage Servicescollaboration with GEAR to engage homeless people. The CBA’s mostrecent experience of diversification of the workforce is tied in with targetsset by the Heritage Lottery Fund for the Community ArchaeologicalBursaries Project. Suzie examined how this project challenged thetraditional image of the archaeology profession by retaining diversitytargets yet remaining fair to all potential candidates.

Michael Nevell then looked at some of the theoretical issues and practicesbehind community archaeology projects. After assessing the increasingscale of the voluntary sector (doubling to c 215,000 individuals involvedannually between 1985/86 and 2009) and the role of academicarchaeology in professionalising, and often excluding, voluntaryinvolvement through elitist language and concepts, he sought to outlinehow the significance and impact of such projects could be recorded andassessed. Impact could be measured by collecting evidence-based researchto look at snapshots of volunteers’ experiences and responses to small-scale projects, as well as ‘longitudinal’ information – that is informationacross the life of a project which shows the longer-term impact of people’sexperiences. Methodologies for this could be used and adapted fromnational voluntary groups and the Museum and Libraries Association. Heconcluded that community archaeology projects should look at measuringtheir impact on people’s quality of life.

Abby Guinness, Surrey County Council, gave the first of three case-studieshighlighting recent outstanding practice in delivering diverse communityheritage through the planning process. She studied two projects currentlybeing undertaken by Heritage Enterprise and the Surrey County

beginning with the funders Kent County Councilworking with the road builders, VolkerFitzpatrickHochtieff. The outreach programme, which employeda dedicated community archaeologist, includedvolunteer opportunities, a community excavation,open days, road shows, school visits, exhibitions anddisplays, talks, guided tours, publicity materialincluding a website and media liaison. It showedhow archaeology could be integrated into a complexdevelopment programme providing benefits both tothe developer (high positive profile and localcommunity engagement) and the local communitythrough increased access to their heritage, trainingand a legacy of continued support.

Paul Belford’s presentation returned to issues ofidentity and community by looking at two small-scaleprojects at Telford New Town undertaken by NEXUSHeritage. These projects looked at the excavation of asmall group of workers’ housing and an iron furnace.Paul noted how a top-down project begun throughthe planning process brought a dispersed communityfrom the workers’ housing, demolished in 1970, backtogether to interact with the post-1970 locals ofTelford New Town. The skills transferred to this groupallowed the New Telford residents to establish theirown heritage group to investigate a local blastfurnace, and so to reclaim a parkland area in thecentre of Telford as historically significant to the localcommunity. Both sites helped to challenge thepopular image of Telford New Town as having nohistoric roots.

The concluding discussion noted that communityarchaeology undertaken through the planningprocess, and particularly under PPS5, was naturallybiased towards top-down, formal programmes ofengagement, and without good examples to follow like those outlined, did not easily lend itself to wider engagement and the participation of marginalised groups.

Michael Nevell MIfA Head of Archaeology, University of Salford

Widening the Audience for Community Archaeology: the Significance of PPS5

Volunteers sorting through the boxes of finds from the 1952 archive © Surrey County Council

Michael Nevell

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1

Telford New Town community dig. Photo: Paul Belford, Nexus Heritage

37A u t u m n 2 0 1 1 N u m b e r 8 1

stories include identification of subtle surfacecracking on Islamic ceramics, comparing submergedwood pre- and post-conservation, recording AngloSaxon metalwork prior to conservation, capturingmedieval graffiti during building renovation, andidentifying heavily eroded brick stamps andinscriptions.

There are two ways to capture reflectancetransformation images: via a lighting dome or arc, orvia highlights on reflective spheres. In the firstmethod we commonly use a lighting dome with 76LEDs to capture a series of images under knownvarying light positions. Every image is taken with adifferent light switched on while object and camerapositions remain the same. As the lights’ locations areknown, data processing requires limited humaninput, and so is appropriate for large collections. Inthe highlight based RTI method, a handheld lightsource (usually a flashgun or torch) and a reflectivesphere (snooker ball for example) are used. As withthe dome setup, the camera and artifact remain in afixed position. The reflective sphere is used by theHighlight RTI software to identify the light location,which is then used for post processing. Highlightbased RTI is more laborious but it is inexpensive,more portable, and can capture a range of objectsizes. The only constraints on the digital camera usedare that it must be able to fire a remote flash (via acable or wirelessly) and have the focus locked.

We see a few areas of benefit to the archaeologicalcommunity

1 increased recording of surface details of objects,with only limited increase in time and expense

2 image processing tools to identify otherwiseinvisible surface properties

3 enhanced visual dissemination of objects toscholars and the general public

4 mechanism for annotation of surface details, andfor sharing these annotations

Examples of our work are presented in a Journal ofArchaeological Science paper available fromhttp://eprints.soton.ac.uk/156253/

If you are interested in learning how this technology might be employed please [email protected] at the University ofSouthampton.

A series of screenshots from

an RTI file showing

a Roman brick stamp from

the AHRC Portus Project.

© University of Southampton

One of the lighting domes produced by the project. © University of Southampton

Highlight based RTI: the setup for highlight based capture of small finds.

© University of Southampton


This has included extensive work recording rock art,stone, graffiti, wall paintings and a host of artefacttypes including cuneiform, lead and wood tablets,textiles, paper, inscriptions, amphora stamps, statues,wood, bone, metal, lithics, ceramics and glass. Thereare even applications for imaging excavated contexts.We have worked with the Portable AntiquitiesScheme, English Heritage, British Museum, BritishLibrary, Ashmolean Museum, Fitzwilliam Museum,the Louvre, Hampshire and Wight Trust for MaritimeArchaeology, Carlsberg Glyptotek amongst others andon projects in Pompeii, Herculaneum, Çatalhöyük,Portus, Medieval Southampton and Winchester. TomGoskar at Wessex Archaeology has also been aprominent user and developer of the technology inthe UK.

The RTI tools are accessible to a wide range of usersand, due to their comparative low cost, we also hopethat there can be widespread adoption of them by thearchaeological community. The software is free to usefor non-commercial purposes. Some of the success

Reflectance Transformation Imaging (RTI) is a technology that uses conventionaldigital photographs to derive detailedsurface shape information. It is a digital,interactive version of the raking lightphotography commonly used in findsphotography and (with the sun) on site to represent subtle changes in surfacemorphology. The University of Southamptonis currently leading a project incollaboration with Oxford Universityfunded by the AHRC further to develop and promote the RTI technology. The IfAconference on 11 April 2011 provided anopportunity to demonstrate the availabletools.

The project team has been working for the past yearwith a range of institutions on capturing RTI data.

Further details are also available on capturetechnique and many other aspects of RTI from thewebsite of our colleagues at Cultural HeritageImaging http://www.c-h-i.org/.

Graeme Earl, Gareth Beale, Hembo Pagi and Nicole SmithArchaeological Computing Research Group,University of Southampton

Reflectance transformation: an approach for imaging archaeological finds

Graeme Earl, Gareth Beale, Hembo Pagi and Nicole Smith

REA

DIN

G 2

01

1

39A u t u m n 2 0 1 1 N u m b e r 8 1

The Expert Panel is relatively small but willincorporate a training programme to allow trainees to assist at scenes of crime and gain the necessaryexperience to become validated.

The opening session of the SIG included twopresentations by John Hunter, MFL Forensics, andSteve Litherland, Cellmark Forensic Services, whichgave an overview of the development of thediscipline and outlined the various applications ofarchaeological techniques within criminalinvestigation in the UK and elsewhere.

Some emphasis was placed on the ways that‘conventional’ and forensic archaeology differed, andthe constraints which apply at a scene of crime. Keydifferences lie in the manner of interrogating buriedremains, for example in the individualisation of thevictim, the manner the grave was dug, the value ofcontact materials and factors of taphonomics. Forensicevidence can be very different to that normally found onarchaeological sites, often in the form of fibres, paint,human materials, clothing, and even cigarette butts.

One major difference is that unlike conventionalarchaeological remains, buried murder victims have a human decay dynamic which can have significantimplications for surface vegetation effects,geophysical survey and thermal imaging. Thereappear to be specific time windows when the gravesmight be best detected.

Forensic archaeology can also embrace the remainsof victims from socio-historical contexts, and perhapsthe best known involves the excavation of massgraves from recent conflicts around the world. Thiscan range from the humanitarian-focused recoveryand identification of victims to the gathering ofevidence for war crimes and criminal investigations -or a combination of the two.

Some idea of the scale and complexity of this workcan be seen by looking at the former Yugoslavia.Here, in the four year war between 1992 and 1996110,000+ people were killed and 2 million displacedfrom an original population of 4 million. Over17,000 bodies have been recovered from 300+ massgraves in Bosnia alone, and still the fate of anestimated 16,000+ people remains unknown.Methodologies advanced significantly during thistime, bringing together analysis of aerial photographsand satellite imagery with geomatics and otherecological disciplines to find and link primary andsecondary grave sites.

In recent years the archaeologically-led recovery ofcombatant and non-combatant victims of major

historic twentieth century conflicts has taken place inmost major European countries. The most recent UKexample being the recovery and on-goingidentification of Allied soldiers killed in the battle ofFromelles (1916) carried out under the auspices ofthe Commonwealth War Graves Commission,UKMOD, and the Australian Defence Force. Thismarks a likely watershed in terms of publicexpectations regarding the recovery of soldier’sremains in the UK.

The Expert Panel is to be chaired by Rob Janaway(Bradford University) with Barrie Simpson (MFLForensics) as Secretary. The Special Interest Groupwill be chaired in the first instance by John Hunter(MFL Forensics), with Barrie Simpson as Secretaryand Caroline Sturdy Colls (Staffordshire University) as Treasurer.

John Hunter, MIfAUniversity of Birmingham

John Hunter giving a paper about forensic archaeology © Martin Newman

Photo © Wessex

Archaeology Members of the new group at the AGM © Martin Newman


This SIG is different from others in that it also embodies an ‘Expert Panel’, the members of which are deemedsufficiently experienced and competent in forensic archaeology to operate within the police structure. Thisdevelopment was partly driven by the office of the Forensic Regulator (based in the Home Office) as part of abroader remit to ensure appropriate standards in all areas of forensic science. The Forensic Regulator wasinvolved in the build-up to the SIG and the Expert Panel and is very supportive of IfA acting as the vehicle forvalidation of forensic archaeologists.

This session saw the formal establishment of the new Forensic Archaeology Special InterestGroup (SIG). Its formation stems from a long-standing development in which archaeologyhas gradually been recognised as having a role to play in aspects of criminal investigation,typically in searching for and recovering buried victims of murder.

Forensic Archaeology Special Interest Group AGMR

EAD

ING

20

11

Forensicevidence canbe verydifferent tothat normallyfound onarchaeologicalsites, often inthe form offibres, paint,humanmaterials,clothing, andeven cigarettebutts.

John Hunter

40

Reading Abbey. Photo: Kirsten Collins

(above) Mike Fulford at Calleva Atrebatum and (below) with delegates at the amphitheatre.

Photos: Alison Taylor

41T h e A r c h a e o l o g i s t A u t u m n 2 0 1 1 N u m b e r 8 1

CALLEVA ATREBATUM

Professor Mike Fulford, University of Reading, led aninteresting excursion to the Roman Town of CallevaAtrebatum, once the centre of the territory of theAtrebates; one of Southern Britain’s major late IronAge tribes.

Professor Fulford directs the Silchester Roman TownInsula IX ‘Town Life’ Project, an ongoing excavation ofone block of the Roman town now in its fourteenth year.

After a short coach journey to St Mary the VirginChurch, an interesting building in its own right,Professor Fulford gave a presentation on theimportance of the work carried out at the Roman site,and its impact on commercial archaeology. This wasfollowed by a welcome cup of tea over whichdelegates were able to discuss the project or just takein St Marys mid -13th century wall paintings.

A guided walk around the amphitheatre and townwalls ensued, proving to be something of asentimental journey for a number of delegates who,as it transpired, had worked on various excavations ofthe site, some dating back to the 1970s.

Kirsten Collins and Karen Bewick

Conference excursionsR

EAD

ING

20

11

READING MUSEUM AND ABBEY RUINS

Christelle Beaupoux, Reading Borough Council, and Gill Greenaway,curator at Reading Museum, took two small groups on a tour around theAbbey ruins and associated buildings, and artifacts in the museum.

The ruins are currently closed to the public while investigations into thestate of the remains and the scope of necessary conservation workscontinue. The groups heard about the conservation project, part of theproposed £8million Abbey Quarter regeneration programme, that involvesthe repair and reopening of the ruins which will sit at the heart of a newcultural area.

Reading Abbey was founded by King Henry I in 1121, because of itslocation close to the Thames and the Kennet. When Henry I died inLyons-la-Forêt, Normandy in 1135 his body was returned to Reading, andwas buried in the front of the altar of the then incomplete abbey.

On the Thursday afternoon of Conference, delegates wereoffered the chance to join one of two excursions to localsites of historic interest:


While some members enter the Institute at MIfAlevel, many do not. Progression through themembership grades should mirror your career, so it isimportant to upgrade your membership when you areable to do so. Around 50% of adverts posted in theJIS which require or recommend IfA membershipstate a preferred membership grade, so to be ablemove up the career ladder you should always ensureyour grade is the highest you can achieve. Holdingthe relevant membership grade is also important foryour perception outside of the profession, and for theperception of the industry as a whole by others. TheInstitute works hard to promote archaeology and IfAmembership to other industries, so that theyunderstand how to assess whether an archaeologist iscompetent. If you are not a member at the level thatcorresponds to your role and responsibilities, youmay not be viewed as you might wish.

When you apply to upgrade, it is important toconsider how the grade you are applying for isdifferent to your current grade, and use this to guideyour application. If you are a Student or Affiliatemember, it is a big step to reach PIfA grade. You needto demonstrate that you have the knowledge,autonomy and ability to cope with complexity andperception of competence expected of PIfA members,and you need to select referees who can confirm this.It may take you a little while to develop thesecompetencies and contacts, but it is an importantpart of becoming a professional archaeologist. Askyourself what have you done to give you a goodworking knowledge of key areas of historicenvironment practice? How can you demonstrate thatyou recognise the importance of each step youundertake when you are working? Where have youused your own judgement when undertaking tasks?Answer those questions within your Statement ofCompetence and you will be demonstrating why youshould be a member at PIfA grade.

Joining the Institute is animportant process. For those whojoin at a corporate grade, itdemonstrates a commitment toprofessionalism, and is a way foremployers, clients and colleaguesto understand your level ofcompetence. It also offers a means of feeding into thedevelopment of the profession. Yet joining is just the first stage of a journey that should span your entire career.

The Institute has five membership grades, two are‘non-corporate’ – which means that technicalcompetence is not assessed, and as a result thesemembers don’t have post-nominal letters and cannotsit on Council or vote. Student membership isgranted to individuals enrolled on eligible courses,while Affiliate membership is aimed at individualswho have an active interest in the historicenvironment, or are working in the sector but do notyet qualify for a corporate grade. There are also three‘corporate’ grades: Practitioner (PIfA), Associate (AIfA)and Member (MIfA), which require assessment ofboth ethical and technical competence bycommittee. Applicants have to demonstrate theirlevels of competence through a Statement, throughreferees and by providing examples of work.Corporate grade members are allowed to use post-nominal letters, can sit on Council and vote atmeetings. These are the grades that employers lookfor in job applications, as they are a means ofaccrediting your abilities and achievements.

Similarly the difference between PIfA and AIfA isconsiderable, as is the difference between AIfA andMIfA. The competence matrix in the Applicants’Handbook sets out what you need to demonstrate forall the corporate grades. This is the key documentwhenever you prepare an IfA membership orupgrade application, so make sure you read itfirst. The committee can always tell if it isassessing an application fromsomebody who has not!

You will probablyfind your PersonalDevelopment Plan andCPD log useful for this. Thinkabout the learning opportunitiesyou have had, or hope to have in thefuture, and how they might feed into yourcompetences in these four areas. Whatopportunities have you taken at work since you lastapplied? You may have had experiences outside ofyour job that you can discuss in your application too.

Sometimes upgrade applications are unsuccessful.This is not always a reflection of your professionalability, though sometimes it may be that you have notreached the level required. If this is the case, thecommittee will offer feedback and explain where youdid not meet the criteria. In other cases it is down tothe quality of the application. It can be hard tovalidate eligibility for a higher grade if there isinsufficient detail. Therefore, taking care over yourapplication will increase your chances of success.Make sure that your Statement of Competence is notjust a list of roles and responsibilities but details howyou meet the competency criteria for the grade youare applying for. Examples of your work shouldrepresent your most complex efforts, while yournominated referees should be relevant and preparedto provide a reference.

Upgrading is currently free as Council have waivedthe fees as part of the membership support plan. Ourpresent fees structure also means that changing yourgrade won’t necessarily change your subscriptioncategory, as fees are based on your income (apartfrom Student and Affiliate grades, which have a flat

rate). It’s a little extra work, but you will berecognising your achievements and it will

make it easier for your peers andthose outside the sector to

recognise yourachievements too. If you have

any questions, or would like some feedback

on your application before youapply, please get in touch with

Kathryn Whittington [email protected].

Kathryn Whittington AIfAIFA membership and Services Coordinator

Members will be sharing theirexperiences of upgrading andits benefits in the next issue.

R E C O G N I S I N G YO U R AC H I E V E M E N T S

Kathryn Whittington

44 45T h e A r c h a e o l o g i s t

Philip Rahtz (11 March 1921 – 2 June 2011)

Young people starting out in archaeology in thesecond half of the twentieth century would be luckyto find a more inspiring excavation director thanPhilip Rahtz. Most likely they would first encounterhim down on the ground digging next to them, cladin a decrepit pair of khaki shorts and wielding ashovel – occasionally stopping to hold instant on-siteseminars on what was happening. If excavation istheatre, this was not so much directed theatre asdevised theatre. Everyone was expected to work,contribute and express an opinion. There was a buzz of expectation from morning to night, a sense of mission, of resolving the past’s great riddles,discovering people and revealing events. Things

were not there justto be found andrecorded, but to be unleashed backinto life.

Now that inclusivityand multivocalityare being urged onan overheatedprofession, it is easyto forget that such things were once consideredroutine, agreeable and essential by all successfulpractitioners. Philip Arthur Rahtz was one of the greatarchaeological excavators of the twentieth century.He was born in Bristol on 11 March 1921. After

Bristol Grammar School he was called up and servedin the RAF until 1946. He then worked briefly as ateacher and photographer before being taken on withErnest Greenfield by the Ministry of Public Buildingsand Works to record archaeology ahead of theconstruction of Chew Valley reservoir.

Then, aged thirty-two, he went on to excavate inSpain, Greece and Ghana, as well completing fifty-three excavations in England, thirteen of them inSomerset. His excavations opened windows onBronze Age burials, Roman villas and temples,Anglo-Saxon palaces and cemeteries, medievalhouses, abbeys, churches and a hunting lodge. Thepost-Roman cemetery at Cannington with its youngfemale “saint”, the “Arthurian” fort at Congresbury,King Alfred’s palace at Cheddar and the greatCistercian landscape of Bordesley Abbey arehousehold names in the profession, sites wherehistory was revealed with exceptional clarity,proficiency and common sense.

Rahtz had a near perfect record of reporting anddeserves to be as renowned for finishing andpublishing his excavations as others are for failing todo so. He achieved it by toiling at home, day afterday, turning field records into clear simple narrativessupported by strong graphics. During these marathonindoor campaigns, which took up most of his lifewhen he was not digging or teaching, a network ofwires blasted waves of classical music into everyroom. His was a house where a visit to the lavatorywas met by the Ride of the Valkyries.

The harvest of all this work was twofold: first, he wasinstrumental in forging the application of archaeologyto the Middle Ages. While others theorised the role ofmedieval material culture, he went out and dug it up,creating a legacy on which modern medievalarchaeologists will long continue to draw. Second,when in 1963 he became a lecturer at the Universityof Birmingham, he imported the mud and dust ofarchaeological exploration deep into the academy.Creating the department of archaeology at York,where he became professor in 1978, he extended hisprinciple of on-site empowerment to students. Theywere not there just to listen to lectures, but also to

speak, lecture and intervene. Theyhad to cover all periods, in allplaces, linked by a chain of themes –settlement and economy, urbanism,death and burial.

His gift to teaching was not so muchthis innovative degree, with its rathercontrovertible syllabus, as thedevelopment of education asinteraction: York courses wereinteractive before there was aninternet. Out of term each studenthad to undertake twelve weeks ofresidential fieldwork, because that iswhere the love of archaeology took hold. In term,they were loaded into a minibus and when it stoppedeach had to deliver a ten-minute introductory talkabout a place they may never have seen before.Seminar contributions were expected of studentsfrom Day One. By the time they graduated each hadbeen recorded chairing a seminar, and videoedgiving a public lecture – unusual forms ofexamination but great preparations for real work.

As an academic Rahtz performed two counter-intuitive conjuring tricks: he made medievalarchaeology matter, and he made archaeologicaltheory fun. He leaves a large and affectionatefollowing. In a profession well known for its earthycharacter – in every sense – he relished his reputationas a Lothario, and attributed it somewhateccentrically in his autobiography, LivingArchaeology (2001), to evolutionary forces. His closefriends included some of the most intelligent andinfluential women working in archaeology.

Philip Rahtz died on 2 June 2011, aged ninety, andwas buried at the Anglo-Scandinavian church atKirkdale, North Yorkshire, the subject of his last fieldproject. His first wife, Wendy, died in 1977. They hadthree sons and two daughters. He and his secondwife, Lorna Rosemary Jane Watts, had a son.

From the obituary of Philip Rahtz by that firstappeared in SALON, by Martin Carver

New members

Obituary

ELECTED Member (MIfA)

Timothy Bradley

Jonathan Butler

Andrew Davidson

Judith Doyle

Benjamin Morton

Amanda Feather

Paul Gilman

Gary Trimble

Associate (AIfA)

Timothy

Braybrooke

John Ette

Marie Leverett

Nuala Marshall

James Snee

Practitioner (PIfA)

Joanne Barnes

Sharon Cook

Rachel English

Jim Gunter

Daniel Jackson

Hannah Smith

Sophie

Thoroughgood

Student

Lou Albessard

Reg Amin

Jon Baczkowski

Sarahjayne

Clements

(Drake)

Aaron Colgrove

Claire Dennis

Annamaria Diana

Sam Ferguson

Stephen Foster

Giovanna Fregni

John Goree

Jack Hanson

Andrew McGuire

Anne McIntyre

Matthew Neu

Somayyeh

Mottaghi-

Toramosari

Erin Robinson

Claire Taylor

Emma Turner

Jamie Walker

Gareth Verney

Meike Weber

Jennifer White

Helen White

Lee Woodall

Affiliate

Jennie Avery

Matthew Brooks

Stella De-Villiers

Jonathan Goldberg

Janice Gooch

David Hunt

Helen Mallalieu

David Millum

Stephen O’Brien

Armin Yavari

Sheryl Watt

TRANSFERS Member (MIfA)

Paul Masser

Paul Mason

James Newboult

Andrew Passmore

Emma Rouse

Associate (AIfA)

Thomas Bradley-

Lovekin

Vasileios Tsamis

Practitioner (PIfA)

Owain Mason

ME

MB

ER

S

ME

MB

ER

S

Philip Rahtz

understanding significance - archaeologists.net · 31 34 36 38 40 42 44 page 31 page 21 page 34...

Documents