You are on page 1of 12

The New WHS Trowel1

A G Marvell FSA MIfA


(e-mail andrew@ggat.org.uk)
Synopsis
Are we [archaeologists] in danger of becoming slaves to political presentation? Market-share
might shape some decision-making, but are we really comfortable in the commerciality of the
development bazaar? Is the Historic Environment a discipline? Does our main client, the
general public, have a better conception of our identity than we do?

A young archaeologist is travelling back from a conference by train. In the same carriage are
three senior professionals (representing the contractual, curatorial and consulting branches
of modern professional archaeology). The three seniors are confident in their well-defined
identities, but worried about the impact of market and legislative failure.

They are joined by a timeless archaeologist (the Old-Timer). The ensuing discussion takes a
light-hearted philosophical approach to what an archaeologist can only be, for which we
need to understand what archaeology means.

The Old-Timer draws out that we have become too entrapped or over obsessed by certain
pigeon-holing roles, which mean little or nothing to anyone else other than to the
practitioners themselves, and that in the naming of things we are in danger of losing some of
the fundamentals of the identity of our discipline.

Whilst the seniors leave in irritation and frustration, the Old-Timer explains why this has
happened and why we need to retain a simple core definition of the identity of an
archaeologist with which the young archaeologist agrees.

*******
This is a tale about an encounter a younger colleague of mine had a short while back.

My younger colleague comes from the generation that sociologists like to label Digital
Natives or NetGens2 - that is they have never lived in a world where Information Technology
was not prevalent and thus are at ease with it in all its different aspects. Indeed, they have
difficulty in conceiving how one could exist in a world without ‘electronic’ social networking
and ‘instant’ rapid communication.

Well, I think all of us should know something about the impacts of technological change on
societies.

For the rest of this story we shall refer to my younger colleague as ‘the Newb’ (as spelt
‘newb’ not ‘noob’ – my colleague is not an idiot).3 If you are not familiar with the terms they
are items of modern slang, particularly used by gamers. If you like you can look them up
later in Wiktionary or the Urban Dictionary, but be reassured I don’t mean it to be derogatory.
However, it is true, because despite having a good first degree and also a Master’s part
taught part research (well, these days you need that sort thing to get a foot on the ladder in
this profession) the Newb is new to the game of professional archaeology.

My colleague had wanted to be an archaeologist from an early age and while at school
joined the club for Young Archaeologists run by those excellent people at the CBA.4 This
enthusiasm had continued through University but it had been a bit of shock to discover that
despite having two degrees there were now archaeological National Vocational
Qualifications to be obtained, and also something called a CPD record to be kept, both of
which the Newb had just found out could be an essential part of the evidence-base for
joining ‘the Institute’5 and progressing ever upwards thereafter.

Anyway, to move things on, the Newb was travelling back from a conference by train and by
chance in the same carriage around the table opposite were three other archaeologists all
senior in the profession. Now the Newb was far too junior to be able to identify who they
were and I can’t tell you if what happened was true or not or whether these people are true
to any particular or general character, but … let’s not spoil the story.

The first of these worked in a busy world full of short form expression, mostly three letter
acronyms or TLA for short so we shall think of this person as the CA. The CA had been
lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time when English Heritage started pump-
priming local authority posts and over time had grown to have a rich and diverse remit. On
the one hand there was the planning side of things with both forward strategy and casework,
although the inquiries could be a bit of a pain – there are only so many times that you really
want to subject yourself to legal cross-examination. On another the management of the
records: the gleaming new HER, which with a touch of MIDAS, had risen phoenix-like
overnight from the ashes of the tired old SMR.6 Then there was also the historic landscape
characterisation work, the urban database, the agri-environment schemes, and even the odd
high-level overview project. The County Archaeologist was at ease with the Historic
Environment and its Stewardship, and liked being in the ‘Association’.7 The CA was
comfortable with this identity, but … .

The second was a Chief Executive (or CEO for short). The Chief Executive had once worked
with the CA on something called ‘the circuit’8 but was content to stay in the field for a few
years more gradually moving up the ranks until opportunities came to direct excavations and
then the post-excavation studies had had to be done and the reports published, although
most of the Chief Executive’s junior staff were amazed at the notion that he, or was it she,
had ever held a trowel let alone knew how to use one. At some point the Chief Executive
had found more by chance than design that management came naturally. Having honed up
skills in this area appointment to one of the top organisations working in the field followed
and the post-PPG 16 boom in ‘polluter pays’ archaeology had allowed the Chief Executive to
build up the company. Yes, there had been a few hairy moments along the way, but one got
to know how to use laws of commerce and contract to good effect and turnaround Quantity
Surveyors’ methods and ploys to your company’s advantage. Like any leader of a serious
professional organisation the CEO was accountable for organisational performance, and at
times it seemed endlessly so — to government, the board, clients, consultants, the staff,
academics, inspectors — and for all of this the Chief Executive was well paid (at least by
archaeological standards). The CEO was talented, in this profession you don’t normally get
there if you are not, and at ease with delivering archaeological works and products. The
Chief Executive liked being in the new Federation of Archaeological Managers and
Employers, ‘SCUMmy days’ were long gone, being famous was the thing.9 The Chief
Executive was comfortable with this identity, but ….

The third was a consultant, not I should add one of those with some qualification in ‘heritage’
related studies whose closest experience of archaeological excavation had been watching
Time Team, but someone properly qualified for the role. Many years ago the Consultant had
excavated and written reports, but following a spell with a government agency, an
opportunity had arisen to join a private sector historic environment practice. The Consultant
had an authoritative knowledge of sectoral law, regulation, practice and values, and could
take holistic viewpoints in determining alternative strategies that benefited both the resource
and the consultant’s clients. Although as was the case for the CA and the Chief Executive
there was no peer ‘club’, the Consultant was comfortable with this identity, but ….

*******
The three seniors were deep in conversation. The Heritage Bill was on the shelf, all the
consultation and politicising seemed to have been in vain. Would there yet be a great
reform? Yes a few bits might get coat-tailed (or did they call it ‘Christmas treeing’ these
days?) onto other legislation and some bits and other things might be able to be progressed
without recourse to statute, perhaps through revised planning guidance although the
emphasis behind this, as was ever the case these days, seemed to be with speeding things
up rather than ensuring measured decisions. It looked like there would be little change
before the next election and not much chance immediately thereafter; the archaeological
world was contracting, recession was biting, units and consultancies were shedding jobs,
and there was pressure on authority funded services, if these just stood still they were doing
well.

“Hard times ahead, eh!” A kindly voice said.

The Newb looked up. Standing in front of him was an Old-Timer, but how old was anyone’s
guess. It wasn’t the face weathered from many seasons in the field, the favoured checked
shirt, or the faded knapsack that belied his credentials, but there was a hidden authority in
his presence. The only way that the Newb could describe it afterwards was that it seemed as
though the Old-Timer’s sinews had been stitched together by Ed Harris to form a ‘compleat’
archaeologist at home in both time and space.10

“Mind If I sit down with you?”

“Sure” said the Newb. The others looked up and cautiously nodded.

“Do you know them?” the Newb asked.

“Yes from way back,” replied the Old-Timer, “but I don’t see much of them these days. You
can see they are troubled.”

“Why do you say that?” the Newb enquired.

“Look, the profession’s become fragmented and has lost touch with its identity,” the Old-
Timer replied, adding “and that’s not healthy at a time of pressure.”

Almost at once the Consultant said, “Excuse me, I don’t agree with that, I know what I do
and I’ve a pretty good idea where I’m going.” The others chortled their support.

“Yes, you all know what you do and I know that you are very good at it, but do you know who
you are?” replied the Old-Timer.

“Well of course, we are archaeologists,” they said, with the CA adding, “working in different
areas of course; I am an archaeological curator”.

“Well,” asked the Old-Timer taking up a philosophical stance that has run from Aristotle to
Wittgenstein and beyond, “and what precisely does that mean?”

As the train sped across the country the debate raged on, wandering as these things
sometimes do into the more obscure ends of metaphysics, epistemology and ethics. They
did agree that, as the tutor to Alexander the Great had observed, A is for A and not B, and,
therefore, Archaeologist had to be for Archaeologist.11 By logical extension an
Archaeological Curator could not be an Archaeologist proper – this was somewhat clearer in
the case of the Chief Executive and the Consultant. That there could be a separate identity
of Archaeological Curator was accepted to be true, but not as the CA argued some higher
more developed form of Archaeologist. A was A.

The CEO claimed there was more of a case for the archaeological contractor but this failed
the same test. Reviewing this they agreed that contracting archaeologist or curatorial
archaeologist or consultant archaeologist maintained closer affinity to Archaeologist, but still
A was A and were not these merely descriptions of function rather than identity, although
performance created identity, and, therefore, they were not Archaeologists, but the separate
identity created through their existence, if indeed their existence was accepted.

The Consultant who liked multi-faceted approaches suggested that the answer to the
dilemma lay in there being multiple identities, each integrally correct. The CA and the Chief
Executive liked this, but then for all of them a bit of ‘pick and mix’ often solved their
problems. However, the Old-Timer was having none of this and observed that
‘Archaeologist’ can only be defined as someone versed in the practice of archaeology, and,
therefore, we need to understand what we mean by archaeology.

“Well that’s straightforward enough; that’s what my company does,” said the CEO, “and you
know there has been more excavation and investigation in the past twenty years than in the
previous two hundred. There have been resources available to us that wouldn’t have been
dreamt of and there is a lot of good work being done. I know it took us a little while to
sharpen up, but now we are delivering services in cost-effective and timely ways. The field
archaeologists of today are better trained, equipped, paid and supported than they have
ever been. There is more reporting and publication than ever before, and what’s more
excavation data is made available faster than it was in your day — no more sitting on the
secrets, eh!”

Ignoring the jibe, the Old-Timer replied, “I don’t doubt that at all ends of the scale there have
been good excavations, and indeed lesser works, and that you’ve found practicalities in
doing this that my generation wouldn’t have thought of, like this front and back office thing.”

“What is that?” asked ‘the Newb’.

“Oh, a while back a few of the units found that it was more cost-efficient to have separate
excavation and post-excavation teams so that many of those who excavated and recovered
the data never got to study and report it and those who did the latter didn’t have the
discovery context,” explained the Old-Timer, “it’s contrary to good practice in any discipline
worth its salt, and illustrates the sort of problems when commerce and market forces drive a
profession. Unlike football, archaeology can’t be a game of two halves.”

“Well you can’t criticise us for not being innovative,” replied the Chief Executive. “Anyway I
don’t think anybody does that anymore — it’s a bit of a barrier to Continuous Professional
Development & Training. Look, everything we do is carefully planned and approved by
others including these two over here as well as inspectors of ancient monuments, let alone
the staff and agents of all my clients. Do you realise how much paperwork my staff have to
produce before they can even go to the tool store and pick up a box of trowels? Not like in
your day. No designs or approvals, gather together a few students or volunteers, pack a few
tents into the old camper van and away we go for a happy weekend’s digging.”

“At least we all had our own trowels,” replied the Old-Timer reaching into his knapsack and
pulling out an old WHS trowel,12 “mine is always with me. Well-made things, these too. Do
you know if it hadn’t been for a few people down Oxford way making a fuss a couple of
years ago we would have had to start importing trowels from overseas.13 I can’t believe that
anyone can call themselves an archaeologist and not own a trowel, but then I’m old
fashioned.”

“I thought you wanted to define archaeology, not talk about its tool-kit,” interjected the
Consultant.

“Surely this is straightforward,” ventured the Newb, recalling an undergraduate lecture,


“archaeology is the systematic study of past human life and culture through the investigation
of surviving material evidence.”

“Well, yes and no,” said the CA, “we have all heard many variants of that, but nothing is
agreed.”

“Yes,” added the Consultant, “there is no central law of archaeology and this gives us an
advantage in that we have the flexibility to redefine it.”

‘From week to week in some cases,” the CEO observed dryly.

“I am not sure that holds water,” said the Old-Timer, “although I agree that the absence of a
central law of archaeology creates particular problems and some try to redefine our
archaeologies too easily and often without thinking through the consequences.”

“But surely,” said the Consultant, “because there is no central law this has created a
dynamic that has allowed us seamlessly to engage and embrace other disciplines with all
the benefits that have come from that interaction”.

“Yes,” said the Old-Timer “but only in so far that the benefits do not require change to the
fundamentals of the discipline”.

“Have they always remained intact?” questioned the CA, adding, “you know as well as us
that archaeology has been redefined as its theory has developed but because there is no
general theory for the discipline old definitions have failed as new theories have emerged. I
am not advocating that it has been a simple straight path but new archaeology and its
scientific approaches challenged the accepted empirical historio-cultural approaches but in
turn couldn’t be sustained against the attacks of the post-processualists, and no doubt at
some point we will move on again.”

“Indeed,” added the CEO, “but as theory in archaeology has been institutionally separated
from practice the two have developed separately. As you know, the scientific approaches of
New Archaeology failed because rigid testing of initial scientific hypothesis in excavation fails
because a good excavator, whether in rescue or research contexts, cannot ignore evidence
and you know that invariably new evidence will emerge as an excavation progresses.”

“Isn’t that criticism in that old techniques book by someone called Barker?” enquired the
Newb.14

“Well remembered,” answered the CEO, “look, it’s always been difficult to define
archaeology in terms of both theory and practice as the two strands have developed on
separate paths, sometimes learning from each other, sometimes not.”

“And we are moving forward again” added the CA.

“How?” asked the Newb.

“Applied hermeneutics,” answered the CA and the Consultant together.

“Sorry I don’t understand,” said the Newb.

“It’s the art or science of interpretation,” explained the Consultant. “Hodder sees it as better
description of what archaeologists do rather than positivism which is constrained to
establishment of facts.15 We take evidence of and from the past and interpret what it means
for the present. That’s why we can champion the historic environment.”

“But there can be as many layers to the interpretation, as you find in one of our big urban
excavations,” added the CEO gleefully, “and that’s why when Indiana Jones said in those
films ‘Archaeology is the search for fact, not truth’16 he was wrong.”

“Applying hermeneutics has freed us from the past constraints of the discipline and because
we have made this jump from investigators to curators to interpreters we are, as my
colleague has just noted, well-suited to lead the historic environment sector in all its forms, ”
explained the CA going on to add, “and in this post-modernist world with its uncertainties of
place and disconnection with the past but yearning for new certainty, interpreters are more
than ever needed to give proper guidance to policy-makers whilst providing a link to
deliverers and receivers.”

“And” added the Consultant, “with one voice, that’s what my clients want”.

“Mine too,” added the CEO.


“So then archaeology has become the spin doctor for the historic environment,” retorted the
Old-Timer. “You know what worries me is firstly this one voice thing and secondly this over-
championing of the historic environment.”

“Well, it’s not just the clients that want it, but the politicians too,” replied the Consultant.

“You really worry me now,“ replied the Old-Timer, “don’t you remember that Roman
Emperor, Caligula I think, who wanted the mob in the circus to have one voice because he
would then only have to cut off one head.17 We don’t lop off heads these days, but if there is
only one voice there is only one opinion and one opinion is easily heard, and you know that
the reply will be prefaced with ‘thank-you very much for your advice but …,’.”

“How can you be worried about us championing the historic environment?” asked the CA, “it
has given us a clear politically-understood concept with a definition that we all understand.”

“What’s that?” my colleague asked.

“Look, if you want to move ahead in the profession you really must start to look at the
profession’s standards, and you’ll find there that the historic environment is commonly
defined as the imprint of past human activity upon the natural world from prehistoric times
onwards, the product of an interactive process that has created the places where we live
and work now replied the CA going on to add, ”and it’s our job to ensure proper
stewardship.”18

“How does that work?” asked my colleague.

“Well,” replied the CA “to reiterate an agreed definition Stewardship protects and enhances
what is valued in inherited historic assets and places. It responds to the needs and
perceptions of people today and seeks to have regard for the needs of those in the future.
The stewardship role includes undertaking conservation management tasks, communicating
the public value of the heritage, promoting community awareness of the historic environment
and encouraging active engagement in protection and enhancement.” 19

“Lots of preservation, protection and talking but not too much investigation,” interjected the
Old-Timer, “and you are the interpreter of the needs and perceptions of the people today. Do
they have a choice?”

“Aren’t we getting off the point,” interjected the Newb, “I thought we were defining
archaeology to give us identity.”

“We are,” replied the CA, “look there has always been a degree of public interest in what we
do, but that has increased exponentially over the past twenty years or so, and that interest
not only needs to be satisfied but should be harnessed. We no longer have to explain the
past as some inert intangible that is off-putting, but by presenting it in terms of its continuing
value awareness is raised of its relevance for today’s society, and doing that gives
archaeology relevance and by extension makes archaeologists relevant.”

“I can see that this is all very important but it’s not what I have been taught,” observed the
Newb.

“Ah well, undergraduate syllabuses have always been few years behind developments in the
field,” interjected the consultant. “My colleague is right though, and that is why preservation
is so important: it gives us a physical past to interpret and re-interpret, and we have been
developing all kinds of tools to help us do this — historic landscape characterisation for
example.”

“I don’t think that’s archaeology,” said the Old-Timer.


“Well if you give me a chance to finish,” continued the Consultant, “if preservation is the key
to our activity then there is a continuum from there to conservation to restoration to
reconstruction to re-creation and all this needs interpretation.”

“I think Hodder first noted that,” said the CEO.20

“Correct, ” replied the CA, “and he observed that archaeologists need to think where we
want to be on this continuum, but I think if we are championing the Historic Environment in a
way that is relevant then we need to be at both ends of the line.”

“And in the middle,” added the Consultant.

“I am not sure that Building Conservation Officers would agree with that view,” said the Old-
Timer, “they would argue that they manage change to the Historic Environment, or at least
that part that falls within their remit, whereas we merely monitor change and that therefore
philosophically each discipline’s approach to recording and interpretation will be different,21
and isn’t that the inherent problem with all of this. In my time I have also met archivists,
architectural historians, museum keepers and curators, conservationists, amongst many
others who all seem to be doing things connected with the historic environment, and have as
much relevance to it as we do.”

“Look” said the Consultant “since your time we have evolved a way of practicing that suits
our needs and that has allowed the discipline to grow and develop. We have a bigger and
wider remit now. We are clear on our different roles and responsibilities and as others won’t
lead we have moved ourselves into a position as champions for the historic environment.
You need to get up to speed, and furthermore, I know how many of your generation liked to
see culture as a central paradigm for archaeology,22 well, when we start using these
approaches that my friend has also outlined all kinds of interesting new opportunities present
themselves. The Historic Environment is everywhere.”

“Even places that might appear to have no time-depth are important,” added the CA. “Take
those new towns built in the second half of the twentieth century, such as Milton Keynes.
They are all part of our Historic Environment. In fact we should be arguing for their
preservation as they have clearly defined development histories and in their material
th
remains are treasure houses of late 20 century British Culture.”

“Well, ” said the Old-Timer “I don’t doubt that the historic environment is a good thing and I
don’t doubt that we should be an important voice in the sector, but the historic environment
does not define archaeology and archaeology does not define the historic environment. If
that’s the world you want to work in that’s fine but understand the realities. Furthermore you
need to use the F-word a bit more often.”

“Well as a general rule I try not to,” answered the CEO, “but you might make me in a
minute”.

“No! Not that one,” exclaimed the Old-Timer, “F for Fun. You know an old American
archaeologist, Flannery was his name, once said that ‘Archeology is... the most fun you can
have with your pants on’.23 Well mine are still on and I am still having fun.”

“F for facetious more likely,” said the CEO, “I am going to go and get a beer, are you
coming” and he left with the others.

*******

“Sorry to come back to this,” said the Newb, “but I studied archaeology because I have
always been fascinated by the idea of discovering things about the past and communicating
this to others.”
“Good for you,” said the Old-Timer. “I hope you are able to, because until we are trained to
do something different, and what is more willing to be trained, that’s what we have always
done and that’s what everyone out there in the wide world understands by an archaeologist.
You know the popular adage, someone scratching around in the mud with a trowel, and
piecing together bits of old pottery, and telling a story about what they’ve found out. They
won’t connect to archaeological theory, nor the historic environment, nor how it relates to
their needs perceived or interpreted.“

“In that case shouldn’t we be just doing basic good archaeological research?” asked the
Newb.

“Yes, and many do, but sometimes some of the players get carried away and forget which
game they’re in, and that worries me, and I think sometimes we need to take stock and look
from outside rather than within.” The Old-Timer reached into his pocket and pulled out a
scrap of paper. “I found this the other day, something the American cultural critic Camille
Paglia wrote, here it is: ‘Archaeology is our voyage to the past, where we discover who we
were and therefore who we are’,24 and I ask you how many archaeologists do that.”

“For a discipline that spends its time investigating the past we are appalling at recalling our
own development. Do you know there is university near where I live and none of the
students there would know that some of the leading archaeologists in the past 100 years
had posts there, it’s like the place came into being the other week, everything that had gone
before quietly forgotten. Look at these three who have just gone. I know they are all good
people whose heart’s in the right place and who care deeply about what they do, in fact I
don’t know an archaeologist worth his or her salt who doesn’t, but in what they do they are
just products of politically-driven decisions that occurred at a certain time.”

“How’s that?” asked the Newb.

It’s a case of cause and effect and you should know something about that from your studies,
anyway at the risk of putting it in overly simple terms government was forced to respond to
public and international pressures to do more to ameliorate the effects of environmental
change but did this in a context where there were strong strictures on spending from the
public purse and that therefore the ‘polluter-pays’ principles came on-line, but in free-market
economics there has to be a freedom of choice against a separate regulatory background,”
replied the Old-timer. “Now in order to deliver in this world we had to get professional in a
short space of time, and, as you heard, as that Chief Executive was protesting, we have not
done a bad job at that. Although looking at Profiling the Profession we have got some way
to go yet.25 Mind you, if the climate change models are anywhere near correct we may be
digging up a lot of monuments that we have been protecting before they are lost, whether to
rising sea levels, carbon-sink afforestation, or new building as people move away from flood-
plains, and I don’t think that the powers that be are facing up to that yet.”

“Look,” he continued, “I know that there have been some problems at the edges and some
would argue that until the profession can get some barriers to entry, Chartered Status or
equivalent, there always will be, but that in turn creates a dichotomy.”

“How?” asked the Newb.

“Well, we need to have well-trained highly competent archaeologists to deliver services to


governments and other authorities, or to private sector clients who have planning or other
obligations to discharge, but at the same time we need to rely on public support and to do
that we have to be relevant. There has always been a tradition of passive interest, and,
sometimes, direct voluntary involvement, and it is probably greater now than ever before. I
think we could see quite a few challenges and tensions in the next few years. There is going
to be pressure on government finances, the private sector will look to downsize costs. The
arguments are already beginning to be rehearsed.”
“Is there an answer?” asked my colleague.

“There’s no simple solution but we have to remember that all our works should be enriching
human knowledge and understanding, and we need to deliver these to all strands of society,
and, because we have always been able to do this we can interconnect with different social
networks, and positively contribute to what these days they call ‘social capital’, and in many
ways we have always done that perhaps without realising it.”

“What, like these community projects that seem to be happening everywhere?” enquired the
Newb.

“Now then, that’s one of many ways,” replied the Old-Timer, “and have you noted that a few
of these ‘county archaeologists’ seem to be involved with these — never lost their trowels,
eh! And that may suggest a thing or two about false perceptions or how we may be moving
on again. Look there are myriad ways of doing this but one thing is essential: to be relevant
we have to be true to a core identity, people see through you if you change with the wind.”

“So is there a simple definition of archaeology then that we can adhere to and that the public
will understand?” asked the Newb.

“Well, for the last twenty-seven years I have always thought that the definition given by this
Institute that you really should join is as good as it gets because it is simple and clear.”

“What’s that then?” asked the Newb.

“Well their Code of Conduct puts it this way — Archaeology is the study and care of the
physical evidence of the human past.”26

“So, if that’s correct and archaeologists are people versed in the practice of archaeology,
then we have a simple and straightforward path to our identity,” ventured the Newb.

“Yes,” replied the Old-Timer, “and this Institute has a few principles and rules to help us on
our way, and talking of on our way that reminds me I have to go and meet a couple of
friends in the next carriage. Specialists, who I haven’t seen for a while, they have been
‘beavering away’ quietly in the background, and recently they have been re-examining the
collections in a museum basement near where they live and just found out something really
interesting, and have promised to tell me all about it. You know you never stop learning in
this profession. Good luck. See you again sometime,” and with that the Old-Timer was gone.

The train rolled through the countryside and thinking about all that had been said my
colleague dozed off as the warm sunshine came through the window. The train came to a
halt. It had reached its terminus. My colleague woke up. In front of him was a small box. He
opened it inside was a new WHS trowel and a note. It read

“Enjoyed our chat earlier today.

Listen ‘have you ever asked yourself what does the world really want from
archaeology’.27 Well I’ll tell you ‘what the world wants is for archaeology to teach it
something about humanity’s past‘.28 And when we make discoveries or put things
in order or tell new stories then not only are we helping people to connect to the
past, but we are doing a very human thing, and I think from what you said that’s
what you want to do.

And remember that if you get to achieve your goals then hope that what they say
about you is that they trust you to dig their site and that they enjoy reading what
you write, as in my book there are no higher compliments that one archaeologist
can pay another.29
Picked up one of these the other day, use it well.”

My colleague looked around; everyone had left the train. A guard came down the aisle.
Describing the Old-Timer he asked the guard if he had seen where he had gone.

“There has been no one like that on this train,“ replied the guard, “you must have been
dreaming in the sunshine, come on now, off you go.”

*******

I don’t know whether this story is true or not, but even in these difficult times my colleague
has got new drive and purpose, and it made me think that if this Old-Timer was right and at
their core Archaeologists have a simple identity in that as this Institute states that what they
do is to care for and study the physical evidence of the human past it shouldn’t be too
difficult to get this message across, and do we need to complicate matters?

*******
Bibliography
Aitchison K and Edwards R 2008 Archaeology Labour Market Intelligence: Profiling the
Profession 2007-08 (Institute for Archaeologists, Reading ISBN 978-0-948393-94-5)

Barker P 1977 Techniques of Archaeological Excavation (Batsford, London ISBN 0 7134


02723 3)

Chadwick A 1997 ‘Archaeology at the edge of Chaos: Further towards reflexive excavation
methodologies’ Assemblage 3 (University of Sheffield)
http://www.assemblage.group.shef.ac.uk/3/3chad.htm)

Flannery KV 1982 ‘The Golden Marshalltown: A parable for the Archaeology of the 1980s’
American Anthropologist (New Ser) 84 (2) 265-278

Harris E 1979 Principles of Archaeological Stratigraphy (Academic Press, London & New
York ISBN 0123266513)

Hodder I 1993 ‘Changing Configurations’ in Hunter, J & Ralston, I (eds) Archaeological


Resource Management in the UK An Introduction (Alan Sutton, Stroud ISBN 0 7509 0275 2)
11-18

Lemke M 1997 ‘Give me WHS or give me death’ Assemblage 2 (University of Sheffield)


http://www.assemblage.group.shef.ac.uk/2/2trowel2.html

Preston J 2002 A common grounding? - principles, standards and training (Paper presented
at Planning and the Historic Environment 2002 An Agenda for the 21st century, OUDCE,
Oxford 17 May 2002)
(http://www.ihbc.org.uk/recent_papers/docs/PATHE2002/Prestongrounding/Preston.html)
rd
RCHME 1998 MIDAS A Manual and Data Standard for Monument Inventories (3 reprint
with revisions 2003, Swindon ISBN 1 873592 33 7)

Stamper P 1999 ‘Only one way to scratch up the dirt’ British Archaeology 43 (ISSN 1357-
4442) http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba43/ba43int.html

Wittgenstein L 1953 Philosophical Investigations (Blackwell Publishing ISBN 0 631 23127 7)


1
This paper was given as part of the ‘That’s not my field: creating and maintaining professional
identity in an interdisciplinary world’ session at the Institute of Archaeologists Annual Conference
(April 2009), apart from the addition of the synopsis, bibliography, endnotes, and an amended title it is
presented here as read at that conference. The paper takes something in its form and presentational
style from Flannery 1982. I am grateful to Martin Locock for his helpful comments on reading an
earlier version naturally the responsibility for any errors remains mine.

It is but a co-incidence that Kent Flannery’s seminal paper was published in the same year that the
Institute for Archaeologists was founded in the United Kingdom.

The views expressed in this paper are the authors, and should not be taken to represent those of any
organisation that he has, does, or may work for.
2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_native ; http://theshiftedlibrarian.com/archives/tag/netgens .
3
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=newb ;
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Noob ; http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/newb .
4
Council for British Archaeology Young Archaeologists’ Club http://www.britarch.ac.uk/yac/ .
5
The Institute of Field Archaeologists
http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=1 ; Archaeology NVQ
http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icontent/index.php?page=199 ; Archaeology CPDT
http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/icontent/index.php?page=20 .
6
(MIDAS =) Manual and Data Standard for Monument Inventories English Heritage 1998; HER =
Historic Environment Record; SMR = Sites and Monument Record; MIDAS has evolved into MIDAS
Heritage see http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.19938 . See Newman M and Gilman
P Informing the Future of the Past Guidelines for Historic Environment Records (2nd edition 2007)
available on-line at http://www.ifp-plus.info/contents.html .
7
The Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers (http//www.algao.org.uk).
8
Current Archaeology 2009 A Career in Archaeology http://www.archaeology.co.uk/advice/a-career-
in-archaeology.htm .
9
http://www.famearchaeology.co.uk/ FAME began life as the Standing Conference of Archaeological
Unit Managers (SCAUM). Archaeological was added after the acronym SCUM was found to be less
helpful. In 2008 it changed its name to FAME to reflect more accurately its purpose and membership
(loc cit).
10
Harris 1979; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harris_matrix ; for a criticism of the misuse of Harris’ Matrix
see Chadwick 1997.
11
Law of Identity; Aristotle Metaphysics VII; For discussion of language meaning and use see
Wittgenstein 1953, W. through a series of discussions shows that the meaning of the word in question
presupposes our ability to use it. The commonly ascribed Aristotle‘s Law of identity (A is for A) is not
actually set down as such by Aristotle.
12
Lemke1997; Stamper 1999.
13
‘WHS Trowel bites the Dust’ The Digger 39 (Jan 2006
http://www.bajr.org/DiggerMagazine/Digger39/4.html ).
14
Barker 1977, Chapter 4 passim.
15
Hodder 1993, 16.
16
Indiana Jones 1989 Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade Screenplay by Jeff Boam story by George
Lucas and Menno Meyjesb, op cit K Kris Hirst ‘Indiana Jones on Why Archaeology Makes Poor Movie
Plots’ http://archaeology.about.com/od/quotations/qt/quote74.htm .
17
This is a deliberate misquotation. What Suetonius (De Vita XII Ceasarum 4.30) actually records
Caligula as saying is Utinam populus Romanus unam cervicem haberet! "Would that the Roman
people had but one neck!"
18
Standard & Guidance for Stewardship of the Historic Environment (jointly produced by and for The
Institute for Archaeologists, The Institute of Historic Building Conservation and The Association of
Local Government Archaeological Officers (UK) (October 2008) Section D Definitions 1.
19
Standard & Guidance for Stewardship of the Historic Environment (jointly produced by and for The
Institute for Archaeologists, The Institute of Historic Building Conservation and The Association of
Local Government Archaeological Officers (UK) (October 2008) Section D Definitions 6.
20
Hodder 1993, 17.
21
Preston 2002.
22
Flannery 1982, 276-7.
23
Ibid, 278.
24
Paglia C, September 30, 1999 "Mummy Dearest: Archaeology is Unfairly Maligned by Trendy
Academics." Wall Street Journal, p.A26, op cit K Kris Hurst ‘Camille Paglia on Voyages to the Past’
http://archaeology.about.com/od/quotations/qt/quote116.htm .
25
Aitchison and Edwards 2008.
26
By-laws of the Institute for Archaeologists Code of conduct (Revised edition, October 2008),
Introduction para 2 (see also Institute for Archaeologists Yearbook and Directory 2009, 8).
27
Flannery 1982, 272.
28
Ibid.
29
Ibid, 277.

You might also like