Interview with Border Achaeology
Following the excavation and study of remains found in Herefordshire, and a subsequent article in the Hereford Times, I asked Neil Shurety of Border Archaeology if they would be willing to answer some questions. My hope was that the basis of their decision to rebury would be an expression of good practice in current archaeology, which I believe it is. The answers to my questions are below.
1) Perhaps I might begin by asking a simple question about the scope of Border Archaeology, where you are based, how many people work for the organisation? Continuing in that vein, are you connected with a local authority, university or museum? Who fund the organisation and the projects it undertakes? And as a result, how much autonomy do you have, in terms of decision-making and how funds are used?
Border Archaeology is a private commercial company employing 10+ people and as is common practice our income is derived from client derived activities. Our autonomy is absolute as long, obviously, as we observe good archaeological practice, obey the law and complete Council brief requirements.
2) BA were brought to HAD's attention through the article in the local newspaper. It sounded as if your foundational ethos was very much in tune with HAD. Usually we are working with organisations to introduce ideas that you are expressing yourself - which is a joy to us. I shall ask more about specifics of the way BA works below, but can I begin with asking if there is a clear ethos built into the organisation or if it is solely because of individuals who work for it and their decisions and attitudes.
Respect is an oft abused word but our company ethos springs from two simple parameters, the first being always to remember that the collection of human remains one is examining was once a breathing person with feelings and the second being to treat such as one would wish to be treated oneself. One surely cannot go far wrong with such a simple but clear working procedure. Thus good working practice extends to covering up inhumations wherever possible, handling with sensitivity, separate storage of individuals wherever possible etc ..
3) In earlier correspondence with me you said that BA believes in 'treating the dead with respect'. That word is so important, yet it can be defined in so many ways, not just philosophically but in terms of practicalities. It is a difficult question I am asking, but can you offer any definition, or parameters perhaps, for what respect means when it comes to human remains? The dig referred to in the Hereford Times was of a Roman cemetery found at Stretton Grandison in the Hereford Marches. Human remains were disinterred of up to nineteen individuals, and it was decided that all but one are to be reburied. Could you talk a little of BA's policy on retention or reburial?
Our policy assumption is reburial – in a suitable location as near as possible to the place of discovery. This also predetermines my view that we would only remove bodies if strictly necessary – for example if impacted directly by engineering/building works. If not, leave them in situ.
4) Could you share some of the practicalities of reburial of those human remains? How long was it between disinterment and reburial, and what happened to the remains in the interim? Where will they be reburied, who will be invited to attend, will there be ceremony at the burial, and will there be a memorial erected? Who is paying for the reburial?
Reburial will always be in an appropriate container almost certainly wood. The other issues you raise are simply too wide. Normally if we retain bodies temporarily that would only be for scientific analysis and of course we are cognisant of the Ministry of Justice thoughts on the matter. Generally speaking, I arrange the burials with the local church in the belief that reburials require some observation of religious ritual.
5) One individual, named by the archaeological unit Lucius, is not to be reburied. Can you explain why this decision was made, whether he will be accessioned to a museum and where, and whether BA will have any more input in terms of decisions about his future?
Lucius has been requested by Hereford Museum.
6) In the article on the dig, it speaks of BA giving a talk to Ashperton Village Hall about the dig. What is BA's policy on community involvement? What made you decide to do this and, in order to inspire other units to do the same, what were the practicalities of arranging it, and the benefits gained from doing so? HAD promotes its Consultation Policy, which is based on the conviction that human remains have significant value not just to archaeologists and scientists; the social, spiritual and religious value of human remains needs to be acknowledged, and the best way is through consultation. Could you share you views on this?
Our policy is to work where invited with local communities who generally speaking seem to welcome this since most contractors don’t do this – especially as Border seems to be unique in not seeking any external funding for such undertaking!