n.a. (1972). Field survey in British archaeology. York: Council for British Archaeology.

Title
Title
The title of the publication or report
Title:		 Field survey in British archaeology
Number of Pages
Number of Pages
The number of pages in the publication or report
Number of Pages:		 76
Biblio Note
Biblio Note
This is a Bibliographic record only.
Biblio Note		 The ADS have no files for download on this page but further information is available online, normally as an electronic version maintained by the Publisher, or held in a larger collection such as an ADS Archive. Please refer to the DOI or URI listed in the Relations section of this record to locate the information you require. In the case of non-ADS resources, please be aware that we cannot advise further on availability.
Publication Type
Publication Type
The type of publication - report, monograph, journal article or chapter from a book
Publication Type:		 Monograph
Abstract
Abstract
The abstract describing the content of the publication or report
Abstract:		 Charles Thomas's introduction (6-9) defines field survey as "the publishable outcome of systematic fieldwork" and the only way to cut national losses of archaeological sites. Five papers deal with organisation and methods: L V Grinsell (10-13) on the task of the individual fieldworker, P Sheppard on county checklists (13-16), Don Benson on survey and record by a museum-based group (16-21), and Barry Cunliffe (22-3) and George Jobey (23-5) respectively on fieldwork by a university department of archaeology and a university department of adult education. In the second section, Analysis and Interpretation, J J Wymer discusses flint collection from Palaeolithic and Mesolithic sites (26-8); Peter Fowler (28-38) discusses M5-motorway archaeology, and expresses the hope that all future motorways will take archaeology into account at the planning stage; H C Bowen (38-49) picks out some striking results from air photography, including some misleading effects, and stresses that large-scale land organisation is often detectable in early landscapes. C C Taylor (50-59) points to the interrelation of maps and documents with fieldwork, with particular reference to medieval Cambridgeshire. R J C Atkinson (60-66), on demographic implications, illustrates that the relation between population density and cultural change is non-linear, whether examined spatially, temporally, or in terms of amount of knowledge recovered. The concept of population potential may be worth exploring in relation to theoretical territories. P J Fowler sums up (66-8), stressing the recent changes in methods, purpose and nature of field archaeology. A H A Hogg (68-71) appends a note on government organisation of field archaeology in Britain.
Issue Editor
Issue Editor
The editor of the volume or issue
Issue Editor:		 Elizabeth Fowler
Publisher
Publisher
The publisher of the publication or report
Publisher:		 Council for British Archaeology
Year of Publication
Year of Publication
The year the book, article or report was published
Year of Publication:		 1972
Locations
Locations
Any locations covered by the publication or report. This is not the place the book or report was published.
Locations:
Location - Auto Detected: Cambridgeshire
Location - Auto Detected: Britain
Subjects / Periods
Subjects / Periods
Subjects / Periods associated with this record.
Subjects / Periods:
PALAEOLITHIC (Historic England Periods)
MEDIEVAL (Historic England Periods)
MESOLITHIC (Historic England Periods)
Note
Note
Extra information on the publication or report.
Note:		 Date Of Issue From: 1972
Source
Source
Where the record has come from or which dataset it was orginally included in.
Source:
Source icon
BIAB (British Archaeological Abstracts (BAA))
Relations
Relations
Other resources which are relevant to this publication or report
Relations:
URI: http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/cba_op/op3.cfm
Created Date
Created Date
The date the record of the pubication was first entered
Created Date:		 05 Dec 2008