Document Sample
Commentary Powered By Docstoc
       by Gromaticus
       Archaeology above ground                     service. Second, there is probably a          a licence. If the pre-excavation
       While editing this year’s             ,I     market here for a small specialist            evaluation was done properly, it is
       was aware of a feeling that there            organisation with a high level of             likely that neither Act applies and all
       seemed to be rather more standing            expertise in the study of standing            that needs to be done is to inform the
       building surveys than in the past. But       buildings. Third, this is an area in which    police.
       was this just a feeling, based perhaps on    local societies could develop expertise           In most cases, the overall effect
       fallible memory, or did it reflect some      and get involved; perhaps not for the         seems to be one of less red tape for
       reality? There was only one way to find      grander buildings, but for smaller            archaeologists, but I suspect that we
       out – go into some recent                    vernacular buildings of local                 have not heard the last of this story.
       and count the numbers of entries, and        importance. Finally, although it hardly       (information from IFA)
       the numbers that included standing           needs saying, standing buildings
       building survey as part of their             archaeology is here to stay. There can        Binders
       description. I looked at the past six        be no doubt that archaeology above the        We now have a stock of binders in the
       years (two volumes) and came up with         ground is as much archaeology as is           new A4 format, which will hold 16
       the following figures:                       archaeology below the ground. Only            issues each (one volume of 12 issues,
       Year       entries buildings %               the stick-in-the-muds will be stuck in        plus three Round-up supplements and
       2001        390         16       4.1         the mud.                                      an index). They can be obtained, price
       2002        335         12       3.6                                                       £6.00 (overseas £8.00) including
       2003        328         14       4.3         Whose body is it anyway?                      postage, from the Membership
       2004        302         19       6.3         The confusion over the excavation of          Secretary, Dr Jo Udall, 63 Dinmont
       2005        332         20       6.0         burials that we reported in the previous      House, Pritchard's Road, London E2
       2006        385         26       6.8         issue has been partly clarified by the        9BW. They are suitable for holding
       So yes, there is an upward trend, but        issue of an interim advice note from the      earlier issues of Volume 11 in the old
       not as steep as I had expected (the          Ministry of Justice (MoJ). Its main points    format; readers who have already
       numbers in earlier years came as a           are:                                          purchased binders for that volume may
       slight surprise). Next, one might ask             x for excavations of burial grounds      exchange them for the new format free
       where in London are these surveys            which have passed into other use,             of charge by sending them (or
       being done? The year-to-year figures for     neither the Burial Act 1857 nor the           delivering them by hand), together with
       individual boroughs are erratic, so it’s     Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment)            a delivery address for the new binder,
       best to look at the six-year period as a     Act 1981 applies, and therefore no            to the Editor, c/o Institute of
       whole. Three boroughs stand well             applications and licences are required        Archaeology, 31–34 Gordon Square,
       ahead of the others: Westminster (14),            x for burials in churchyards and         London WC1H 0PY.
       Tower Hamlets (13) and Camden (10).          other burial grounds under
       No other borough has more than seven         ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the Burial Act   Fieldwork Round-up
       (Southwark), and twos and threes are         1857 still applies, and faculties and         The Fieldwork and Publication Round-
       the most common counts. Five                 licences should be applied for as in the      up for 2006 is being distributed with
       boroughs report none at all over this        past (licence applications to MoJ)            this issue. Please contact the
       period. In percentage terms, Camden is            x in disused burial grounds which        Membership Secretary (address above)
       easily in the lead at 20%, but this really   have not passed into other use and are        if you have not received your copy. Our
       just reflects the relatively low level of    still set aside as burial grounds, the        thanks go to Cath Maloney for collating
       other archaeological activity in the         Disused Burial Grounds (Amendment)            the Fieldwork Round-up, and to Isabel
       borough. The locations are much as           Act 1981 applies (applications to the         Holroyd for the Publications section.
       one might expect, reflecting a               MoJ for “directions” under that Act.          Please let us know of any omissions.
       combination of the density of historic       Remember to leave plenty of time for
       buildings (Westminster) with the             public advertisements).                       Apology
       pressure of development in the City               Where the two Acts do apply, the         The wallplaster featured on the front
       fringes (Camden, Tower Hamlets). But         MoJ must require reburial of excavated        cover of the Spring isue (Vol. 11, no. 8)
       all boroughs have some historic              human remains within a reasonably             was mistakenly sourced to Lime House.
       buildings, and a low level of survey         rapid timescale. This may not allow           It should, of course, have been Lime
       activity can be expected across the          sufficient time for proper study for large    Street (in London, EC3). Our apologies
       whole of Greater London.                     and important sites, nor retention of         to those concerned.
            What are the implications for           important assemblages. EH are working
       London’s archaeologists? First, that         to try to address this problem with MoJ.      Font size
       there is a growing market for standing            When human remains are                   In response to requests from readers, we
       building surveys, and that a growing         encountered unexpectedly, it should no        have increased the font size used in
       number of organisations offer this           longer be necessary to stop and ask for       Mosaic and Diary from 7 pt to 8 pt.

254 London Archaeologist AUTUMN 2007