Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T08:22:51.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Priority scores for archaeological evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Mark Bowden
Mark Bowden*
Affiliation:
Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England, Line Building, Haymarket Lane, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The new Monuments Protection Programme (Darvill et al. 1987; the November 1987 ANTIQUITY) will depend heavily on scoring systems to assess the relative value of different monuments and areas. Here are some comments by someone else with experience of scoring sites.

Information

Type
Notes
Information
Antiquity , Volume 62 , Issue 235 , June 1988, pp. 286 - 288
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bowden, M.C.B. 1986. Salisbury bypass; archaeological implications. Wiltshire County Council Library and Museum Service. Unpublished.Google Scholar
Canham, R.A. & Chippindale, C.. In press. Managing for effective archaeological conservation: the example of Salisbury Plain military training area, England, Journal of Field Archaeology.Google Scholar
Darvill, T., Saunders, A. & Startin, B.. 1987. A question of national importance: approaches to the evaluation of ancient monuments for the Monuments Protection Programme in England, Antiquity 61: 393–408.Google Scholar
Groube, L.M. 1978. Priorities and problems in Dorset archaeology, in Darvill, T. et al., New approaches to our past: 29–52. Southampton: University of Southampton Archaeological Society.Google Scholar
Groube, L.M. & Bowden, M.C.B.. 1982. The archaeology of rural Dorset: past, present and future. Dorchester: Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society. Monograph 4.Google Scholar
Nieke, M.R. 1987a. Callaly Moor field survey 1987 Newcastle upon Tyne: Archaeological Unit for the North East.Google Scholar
Nieke, M.R. 1987b. Callaly Moor field survey phase 2: autumn 1987. Newcastle upon Tyne: Archaeological Unit for the North East.Google Scholar
Richards, J. Forthcoming. Stonehenge environs survey.Google Scholar
RCHME. Forthcoming. The earthworks of south Wiltshire.Google Scholar
SPTAAWP. 1986. Salisbury Plain Training Area Archaeological Working Party report 1984–5. Bristol: PSA.Google Scholar
Topping, P. 1987. A ‘New’ Signal Station in Cumbria, Britannia 18: 298–300.Google Scholar
Topping, P. Forthcoming. Early cultivation in Northumberland and the Borders, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society.Google Scholar