You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Archaeology’ category.
This year’s Festival of British Archaeology has some great events and we’ll be highlighting some in the coming weeks. One general point stands out though. Archaeologists are always wanting better funding so you’d expect the Festival to be used to demonstrate to the Public that every penny of their taxes spent on Archaeology and the historic environment is well spent. Mostly it is. But ….
Dowsing? Good luck to dowsers, they’re entitled to their hobby but should the Archaeo-church be so broad as to include them? Should the Festival include a demonstration of “archaeology dowsing techniques” to locate and record a former house? Shouldn’t Archaeology be presenting itself as something that doesn’t include some things? After all, no-one would want their taxes spent on the NHS if it included projects conducted by witchdoctors!
And then there’s metal detecting. Which archaeologist would wish the public to think artefact hunting is Archaeology. Or even worse, that Archaeology is artefact hunting! However widely you define Archaeology, collecting stuff for personal benefit it ain’t. Yet it’s still there in full view (albeit less than last year) in the heart of the Festival listings. So perhaps the church IS too broad?
Last weekend saw two archaeological events, some 25 minutes travel apart, which I was fortunate enough to be able to attend.
The first was an Open Day, held by Wessex Archaeology and entitled Extracting the Past. It highlighted their recent work at the Kingsmead Quarry, Horton, west of Heathrow Airport. The area is a complex archaeological landscape with evidence of human occupation spanning a period of over 12,000 years, since the last Ice Age. Particular focus was given to the recently announced find of a rare ‘Beaker Burial‘ of a woman, which included several gold beads (the bling always draws them in!)
The event, in the local Village Hall at Wraysbury, comprised of several information panels, leading through the story of the use of the area, from the Ice Age through to Roman and Anglo-Saxon times. In addition, cabinets of some of the wonderful finds were available to peruse, with several very knowledgeable, friendly and approachable staff on hand to answer any questions. We were greeted and guided as we arrived and generally made to feel most welcome. The various exhibits were explained as we moved around the hall, with someone always on hand to answer any queries or questions. My particular thanks go to Dr Alistair Barclay, who allowed us a close-up examination of an exquisitely worked Picardy bronze clothes pin.
As you’d expect of Wessex Archaeology, a couple of experts ‘of Time Time fame‘ were also on hand to draw in the public with known names:
Jackie McKinley was examining a human skeleton. Was it the Beaker woman herself? I’m not sure but doubt it, as the bones were open for examination by visitors. Jackie was explaining what the bones could tell us about the person and how they lived.
Meanwhile, in a side hall, Phil Harding was giving demonstrations of his flint knapping knowledge and skills, and generally entertaining his audience with tales of how he started knapping. I found this to be extremely informative, with Phil explaining in plain language the nuances of the different techniques, and what he looks for in a piece of flint when selecting a piece for a particular purpose.
In addition, there were activities for children – including simple pot making and excavation (in a sandpit!) as well as several trays of finds to identify by period.
In terms of outreach, and from what I saw and experienced, I’d have to say the event was an unqualified success. I had arrived relatively early in the day, and after an hour or so decided to take my leave, by which time the hall was filling up and getting quite busy – the event obviously proving popular with the locals!
But I had another appointment, some 10 miles south as the crow flies, in Woking: the AGM of RESCUE, the British Archaeological Trust, of which Heritage Action are proud to hold Affiliate membership.
A relatively short business meeting was held, with the usual reports from Chair, Secretary and Treasurer, and elections for vacant posts. This was followed by an Open Meeting with Gail Boyle, chair of the Society of Museum Archaeologists and Duncan Brown from English Heritage talking about ‘Trouble in store: the crisis facing archaeological archives‘.
The bald facts are that many museums simply cannot keep pace with the scale of developer-led archaeology and, largely due to swingeing government cuts simply do not have the resources to deal with the finds and documentation archives created by development such as those from Kingsmead Quarry, visited earlier in the day.
The point was made that although publication and deposition of findings is often a legal requirement attached to many developments, there is no associated legal requirement for local authorities a) to provide museum facilities or b) to provide deposition facilities, which creates a very large problem.
The talk centred around two documents – a report from the IfA’s ‘Southport Group‘ collated in 2010 which discussed the fact that:
Ultimately, the underlying principles of PPS5 and the Government Statement paint a vision of the future where planning-led investigation of the historic environment delivers far greater rewards and far more immediately recognisable benefits for society as a whole than ever before. Even if or when PPS5 is absorbed into the National Heritage Planning Framework, as anticipated will take place later this year, those principles are set to endure.
and also a recent survey and report produced by the Society of Museum Archaeologists (SMA) . The preface to the report states:
Despite a tacit acceptance that archaeological archives present their own particular set of problems and a few clarion calls like the one above, penned by Dr Ian Longworth as far back as 1991, the archaeological world has continued to find it difficult to come to terms with housing the end product of its investigations.
A growing realisation that, in some areas at least, the situation had become critical resulted in a number of initiatives, not least the day-conference Trouble in Store, organised by the Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers and held at York in July 2011.
Following the conference FAME and the Society of Museum Archaeologists embarked on a joint initiative, with financial assistance from English Heritage, to attempt to quantify and qualify the current picture, and produce a set of recommendations for future storage strategies.
The report (161 museums were surveyed, 134 provided responses) includes some quite damning statistics.
- Only 84 museums were able to accept depositions without known conditions.
- In 47 local authority areas, there were no museums accepting collections. An interactive map is available on the Archaeology Data Service (ADS) showing details of organisations that are accepting archaeological archives.
- Only around 30% of museums had a specialist archaeology curator.
- In terms of storage, on average, local history collections took up 45% of storage space compared with 22% for archaeological collections.
- Archaeological collections and archives are used in many different ways. A significant number of these would be impossible without specialist archaeological expertise.
The report put forward a series of eight recommendations, and these are currently being worked on, in league with other organisations. In addition, a set of pan-European standards are being worked towards.
There was some discussion following the talk, with mention of use of a Cumbrian salt mine as an economical repository, but there was some concern about the effects of salt on some depositions. The situation is being monitored closely.
As a non-archaeologist, I was surprised at the scale of the problem – I’d been aware that Devizes Museum had announced they would take no more depositions due to lack of available space, but wasn’t aware that so many areas had no facility for deposition at all, nor about the legal dichotomy involved within the planning process. There is obviously much work to be done to try to resolve some of these issues, but with very few easy answers forthcoming.
Slides from the presentation can be viewed here.
We would urge everyone concerned about the multitude of threats to our archaeological heritage to support RESCUE in their campaigning work. Individual membership costs less than 5p per day (£15/year) and every membership helps.
I have recently returned from another of my regular trips to Cornwall, which as usual, involved several visits to heritage sites. What follows is a short description of one such visit, which coincided with an Open Day (actually an Open Weekend, but I only attended for part of the second day) at Frying Pan Field, the site of Carwynnen Quoit.
The weekend of 6-7th April 2013 saw ‘Quest for the Quoit’ a neolithic exhibition of crafts and an archaeological test pit dig at the Frying Pan field near Troon. Also included in the weekend were geocaching, poetry, and various walks and talks.
I arrived at the site in good time on a bitterly cold Sunday morning, and was greeted by Pip Richards, Project Director, who I’d met when visiting the site last year. I had specifically come on this occasion to hear Jacky Nowakowski, Senior Archaeologist at Cornwall Heritage Environmemnt Service, talk about the quoit, its history and last year’s dig findings, but as her talk wasn’t scheduled to start for a while, I took a look at the four test pits that had been started the previous day, and some of the finds that had come from them.
One pit was much more interesting than the others as some stones had been uncovered. Possibly nothing, but also possibly part of a wall or other structure. More investigation will be required here in future. Many of the finds from the four pits were of pottery, from C18th dinner plate fragments and a rather nice medieval piece of pot edge, back through to Iron Age. Several flints were also found.
At this point I noticed a crowd gathering uphill at the gazebo tent constructed to provide some shelter, and joined the 30 or so other hardy souls for the start of the talks. Pip introduced Jacky, and the talk was under way. Jacky gave us some highlights of the history of the quoit. Those I noted included:
- First recorded by Edward Lhuyd Welsh antiquarian, who visited Cornwall in 1700.
- First illustrated in 1750 by William Borlase.
- Collapsed in 1830s and reconstructed.
- Collapsed again in 1967, possibly due to a minor earth tremor.
- The Sustainable Trust purchased the field in 2009 with the aim of restoring it to its former glory and for use as a community resource.
- Test pits in July 2012 gave a picture around the collapsed stones, allowing planning for a larger excavation in September. Stones were recorded and moved to one side ready for the excavation.
- Three uprights of 2 tons each and the capstone at just under 10 tons make up the main components of the monument.
- Excavation in September 2012 uncovered the footprint of the tomb and socket holes, and an unexpected stone pavement.
Jacky made the point that the ground under the monument was much better preserved than expected, given the 1830s restoration. Many artefacts were found during the excavation, dating to the early Neolithic period – pottery, burnt flint, greenstone pestle etc. Radiocarbon dates are eagerly awaited for some organic material retrieved from one of the post holes. It was felt that the way the monument collapsed actually aided the preservation, as the ground was covered by the large stones, thus blocking access to treasure hunters etc.
The group then moved down to the test pits, where some of the more recent finds were handed around the audience and the preliminary results of the weekend’s dig were discussed. The well received lecture ended at the stones themselves, with Jacky battling a strong wind to display various plans and photographs from the top of the capstone, which made a handy platform for the latter part of her talk.
With Jacky running slightly over time, those of us still around were advised of the next talk about to commence up at the gazebo, which involved discussion of the use of fungi to transport fire in the Neolithic. I didn’t attend this, which I assumed would cover similar ground to a recent Ray Mears TV program, but Sally Herriet had a small area outside the gazebo and was telling people about her attempts at preparing hides, using prehistoric techniques and materials for different uses, and I was drawn in to listen to her.
I found Sally’s experiments very interesting, including the use of various parts of the carcass, including brains, to prepare and soften the hide. She also had some samples of hides prepared in different ways – some were soft as a car chamois leather, others were stiff as a board, and possible uses for this could have included defense in battle, as shield, though some of the samples felt as if they may shatter if hit too hard!
The commencement of a botanical talk and fieldwalk to find various wild flowers drew away much of Sally’s audience, and the rest of the day was scheduled to include a storytelling session, and a ramble around the neighbouring woods, at which point I took my leave.
In summary, a very entertaining and educational day, which could have been better attended – the wind was bitingly cold – but those 40-50 people I saw while I was there all obviously enjoyed the event. The Sustainable Trust are working very hard to make the project as inclusive as possible, and there is a lot of local interest, as well as a growing interest from further afield, for which the Trust are to be applauded. I look forward to returning once again in the near future to see what progress has been made toward a full restoration. Check out the latest news on their dedicated web site at http://www.giantsquoit.org.
by Sandy Gerrard
It was reported earlier this year in the Heritage Journal that a ban on the use of asulam could have a serious impact on the control of destructive bracken on enormous numbers of archaeological sites. The Chemicals Regulation Directorate (CRD) has recently announced that the application for an Emergency Authorisation has been approved. This is good news and means that the chemical control of bracken will be possible in 2013.
The authorisation will allow restricted use of asulam (in Asulox) in the UK, during 2013, although the long-term aim is for asulam to be approved in the EU. However, additional data must be collected to support the application and it will not be until 2016, at the earliest, that approval may take place. In the meantime it should be emphasised that the Emergency Authorisation period is for a period of 120-days, from 20 May 2013. Full details of a press release issued by the Bracken Control Group can be found here.
This is an important issue for the management of upland archaeology in particular and a long term solution needs to be reached.
by Alan S
For those of us that have been in this hobby/profession/obsession for a few years it’s easy to forget that every single day new people are taking their very first step into the field and may well feel in need of a very basic outline of what it’s all about. So here, especially for them is an old newbies guide for new newbies. Standard Caveat: I am neither an archaeologist, historian or scholar.
Archaeology. The word comes from the Greek (arkhaiologia, ‘discourse about ancient things’), but today it has come to mean the study of human history and prehistory through the excavation of sites and the analysis of artefacts and other physical remains.
The beginnings of modern archaeology can be traced back to medieval times, where ploughshares would occasionally turn up the odd arrowhead, or worked flint. Often cited as elven tools and weapons, attributed to the little people or the gods, they were something to be wondered at, often feared. But they were also collected by more scholarly types, often displayed in a ‘Cabinet of Curiosities‘.
By the 1500′s, clerics and other ‘men of learning’ with far too much time on their hands began to get curious about the lumps and bumps evident in the landscape, along with the workings of the ‘old ones’; barrows, ‘Roman Camps’, dolmens, henges, stone circles and the like. In many cases this curiosity was fulfilled by sketches and fanciful writings of lost tribes, arcane druidic rites and other fantasies. This new pastime led to many scholars, later dubbed ‘antiquarians’ to visit, sketch and survey a multitude of sites, often recording them for the first time. Names such as Aubrey, Stow, Camden all belong to this initial period of modern archaeology.
By the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, excavations were more and more common, with some gangs of labourers ‘excavating’ a dozen or more barrows in a day, in searches often motivated by a hope of ‘treasure’, with little or no thought by this time of other knowledge that could be gained. It was during this period that many features were lost – stone circles cast down and broken up or buried, barrows flattened etc. However, slowly the idea that gilded treasure may not be the only reward to be gained took hold, and some excavators took more pains to record their work, giving rise to the idea that the deeper something is, then generally the older it is. The science of stratification – dating by layers – was born.
In the early nineteenth century, this idea of systematic excavation rather than blindly ‘digging for gold’ signified the change from ‘antiquarianism’ to true archaeology as we know it today, and by the end of the century those such as Pitt-Rivers had almost entirely abandoned the treasure-hunt in favour of a search for information, and a means of answering specific questions about the past. Pitt-Rivers’ approach was highly methodical by the standards of the time, and he is widely regarded as the first scientific archaeologist to work in Britain.
In the late 1800′s it was becoming increasingly obvious that we are dealing with a finite resource that needed protection, but it wasn’t until 1913 that the Ancient Monuments Act finally came into force. The new Act, replacing earlier, mostly ineffective legislation did three things.
- It allowed for a compulsory ‘Preservation Order’ when a monument or building of sufficient ‘historic, architectural, traditional, artistic, or archaeological interest’ was at risk of demolition by a private owner.
- It allowed the ‘scheduling’ of monuments, which involved compiling a list, or schedule, of monuments which were deemed to be of ‘national importance’. Once on the list, it became a crime to damage such a monument.
- It provided the Office of Works with powers to take into guardianship monuments of outstanding importance. Public access was made a right for all new such guardianships. This year, English Heritage are celebrating the centenary of the 1913 Act.
The last century or so has seen an explosion in the scale of interest and public participation in archaeology, with the likes of Mortimer Wheeler, Atkinson and more recently the Time Team television series. But two major general trends have emerged: excavations take longer than in the past (Time Team excepted, although even their celebrated 3-day digs involve weeks or months of preparation and post-excavation activities), are planned and executed more meticulously than ever before, and specialisms in archaeology – or more correctly the branches of science involved in an archaeological excavation have expanded, and continue to do so. It’s less and less likely that someone describes themselves as just an ‘archaeologist’. Geophysicists, dendrochronologists, LIDAR specialists, aerial photographers, desk-based researchers, historians, botanists, oesteologists, Post-Ex Finds Specialists (with all the sub-divisions that entails) and even specialists in ancient breeds of snail, and more are all valid specialisms within the range of an average archaeology ‘dig’ today.
Consequently, the amount of information to be gleaned from a dig today is exponentially greater than that even from 30 years ago, allowing ever more insightful glimpses into a past that many of us can only imagine.
Yet despite all these apparent advances, it seems that some are determinedly rooted in the past, in more ways than one. As is evidenced from our recent exposé of the nighthawking activity at the Staffordshire Hoard findspot, the mentality of the treasure-hunting barrow-digger gangs is sadly still with us.
So to those people just discovering an interest in our past I say: Ignore the shiny things and concentrate on what is important. When visiting an archaeological site, look around, and use your imagination to immerse yourself in a world that is long gone. Our heritage is a finite and precious resource that belongs to all of us. It’s future is in your hands, take care of it!
We’re pleased to be able to present a guest post by Peter Cornall, the Area Representatives Convenor for the Cornwall Archaeological Society, telling us a little about the Society’s “Monument Watch” scheme and its workings.
The late Tony Blackman was President of the Cornwall Archaeological Society until his untimely death early in 2012. Highly regarded both locally and nationally, in particular for his work with young people, Tony felt keenly the need to offer members of a local Society the chance to play an active role in the archaeology of their area. Opportunities in excavation for amateurs are infrequent, even in a region rich in monuments of the past. Other openings were to be sought, one being helping with the care of Cornwall’s ancient monuments.
Of these hundreds of monuments, scheduled and unscheduled, some may be found to be under no threat at all, while others may be neglected and clearly at risk. All stand to benefit from regular inspection, so it is no wonder that the development of Monument Watch across Cornwall came to seem a highly appropriate objective for the Society. The idea is by no means new, and important groups of volunteers have for some time been active in the protection and sometimes also the physical care and maintenance of monuments in several areas of Cornwall, including the Lizard, Meneage, West Penwith, Newquay and Bodmin Moor. Monument Watch countywide is in debt to their pioneering example.
For many years, the Cornwall Archaeological Society had recognised volunteer ‘Area Representatives’ acting as archaeological watchdogs for whatever group of parishes each felt to be within their reach. The members of this small group met quite informally each spring and autumn to exchange ideas and to report significant items of archaeological news, which might prompt the Society to action, often in concert with the Cornwall Historic Environment Service, English Heritage and the National Trust. It was this group which could be developed into a countywide watchdog for monuments, although this would never be the whole of its work.
During the past four years the group has doubled to twenty, as new volunteers have been recruited from the CAS membership, each to ‘adopt’ a contiguous group of ‘orphan’ parishes which the new Area Representative feels able to cover. By the autumn of 2012 the whole of Cornwall’s considerable land area and all its numerous Scheduled Monuments were covered by the scheme. (We also have an associate in the Isles of Scilly, who works alongside us.) A Short Guide has been written to describe the role of Area Representative; this paper can be consulted on the AR page of the CAS website, and probably offers the best concise picture of what we are trying to do. Our Monitoring Report Forms can also be found on the website.
This group of monument watchers now includes a wide range of age, experience and expertness, with some of the local heritage professionals doubling as advisers and Area Representatives. After careful discussion, a format for reporting has been devised which meets the recording needs of both English Heritage and the Cornwall Historic Environment Record. Reports on monuments can be submitted at any time either by e-mail or post, and the steady flow of these new-style reports is now of key importance to the sadly shrunken group of professionals in Truro. Thanks to this routine process, monuments under threat can be identified and action taken, while those reported as comparatively safe and sound -happily the majority- need not take up precious time. In this manner, Tony Blackman’s original wish to offer Society members a chance to be more active has led to an important and most timely collaboration between volunteers and professionals, just when resources for heritage protection are under serious threat.
It is possible, I guess, that this account may come under the eye of enthusiasts in other parts of the country where no such collaboration as that described here yet exists. There is one aspect of our Monument Watch which we would not offer up as ideal. Ours has been an organic growth, with the untidiness often associated with such a pattern of development. A group starting from scratch would certainly wish to achieve a more even distribution of responsibility for Scheduled Monuments than ours, which is numerically grossly uneven, reflecting the history of the Area Representatives group and its relatively rapid expansion. We have not seen fit, as yet, to attempt any redistribution of parishes in order to achieve a fairer sharing of burdens. Our answer has rather been to encourage the ARs to form support groups (where these do not already exist) or to recruit friends and fellow-members as sharers in the monitoring work. At the same time, we recognize the inherent difficulty of achieving even an approximate evenness of load, where the variables of terrain, distance, monument type and site distribution are so significant.
Our distribution of MW responsibilities to Area Representatives happens – somehow – to be based on the ancient ecclesiastical parishes of Cornwall; church and civil changes over the years have sometimes complicated matters for us, and more up-to-date boundaries would obviously be easier to use.
Then there must be more exciting – and descriptive – titles for monument watchers than ‘Area Representatives’, even when their duties (like ours) extend further than simply MW, and I am sure that they will be found and employed!
Any scheme starting-up elsewhere would certainly wish to ensure that all its monument watchers could at least send in their reports online, even if not all would be ready to deploy every possible gadget in the field, seeking their targets by GPS, making notes on tablets and taking their photographs on smart phones. Some of us in Cornwall still cherish the compass, the map, the notebook and the camera!
Our grateful thanks go to Peter for taking time out to put together this account of an important part of the Society’s work. If your local society has a similar or comparable scheme, please let us know and we’d be happy to give space to it here on the Heritage Journal.
Quote obtained from Engravers World Ltd (with whom we have no connection whatsoever. Other suppliers are available!)
(The suggestion isn’t appropriate for London of course as EH will recommence there soon no doubt).
The Council for British Archaeology (CBA) have recently released a free new booklet for download, providing information on ‘Prehistoric Monuments on the A1 Corridor. The PDF document covers the area between Ferrybridge and Catterick, taking in the Thornborough Henges, The Devils Arrows, and various other barrows, cursii and henges in between.
The document covers several topics, such as the Landscape Setting of the area, Types of Neolithic and Bronze Age moneuments to be seen, the Major Monuments in the area, Threats to Prehistoric Landscapes and Management of Archaeological Landscapes.
As with all new projects, there is inevitably room for improvment, and the supplied PDF is a mixture of single and double page spreads, and horizontally laid ‘portrait pages, all of which is not entirely conducive to an easy on-screen read, and we would have preferred to see a single page format used throughout for ease of printing.
But overall, this looks to be a good initiative from the CBA, providing a decent basic background to the area, on which a reasonable sightseeing trip could be based. We look forward to further documents in the series covering other major routes and groupings of monuments. Some obvious ideas which immediately come to mind:
- A20 – The Medway Monuments, Wrotham to Maidstone
- M25 – The Ancient Heathrow Landscape, West Drayton to Staines
- A303 – The Stonehenge WHS
- A35 – The Dorset barrow cemetary group, Dorchester to Bridport
- A4 - The Avebury WHS
- A44 – The Oxfordshire Stones, Woodstock to Long Compton
Which area(s) would you like to see covered in this series? Let us know in the comments and maybe the CBA will pick up on the ideas?
By Alan Simkins
Our brief Cornwall break continues…
As regular readers will be aware, I’ve visited the National Maritime Museum a couple of times since last Spring, to check on the progress of their reconstruction of a Bronze Age boat, based upon the design of a boat uncovered at Ferriby in East Yorkshire. This is true experimental archaeology, using only hand tools that would have been available at the time.
The original plan was for the boat, started in April, to be launched sometime in October, but several delays meant that this deadline was missed. On my last visit in October, a possible date in November was mentioned for the launch, but this was always overly ambitious, given the work left to do. A new date of early spring this year has now been set for the flotation.
And so, on the last day of 2012 I visited again (the museum having a policy of limitless revisits in a 12 month period) to gauge the state of play. Luckily, although the group was on a Christmas break, one of the volunteers had popped in to finish off his last paddle, and after a brief discussion invited me behind the barriers to take a close up look, for which I’m very grateful.
At first glance, it didn’t look as if much real progress had been made, but on closer inspection a great deal has been accomplished. The second of three layers of planks have been added to the sides, and much of the yew stitching to hold the planks together has been completed, including the caulking. This has been done using a mixture of moss, wood shavings and sheep fat, and looks to be very effective.
The completed vessel will be just over 49 feet long, and weigh approx 5 tons. There are 7 struts along its length, and it will be powered by 16-18 rowers, using 5′ paddles made of ash. A total of 20 paddles have been prepared.
The project has been managed by professional boatbuilder Brian Cumby, under the control of Exeter University, and with a team of 15 volunteers. Month by month time lapse videos of the build are available via YouTube.
The nominees for the 5th Annual Archaeology Awards, run by Current Archaeology magazine have now been announced, and voting is now open.
Once again, there are four categories in which to vote; Archaeologist of the Year (4 nominees), Book of the Year (6 nominees), Rescue Dig of the Year (6 nominees), and Research Project of the Year (6 nominees). Full details of the nominees can be found on the Awards website.
Last year’s winners were as follows:
- Archaeologist of the year: – Tony Wilmott
- Rescue Dig of the Year: – Sea of Troubles: Scotland’s Eroding Heritage
- Book of the Year: – Becoming an Archaeologist: a guide to professional pathways by Joe Flatman
- Research Project of the Year: – Massacre at Fin Cop
Winners are decided purely via public vote on the website – there is no panel of judges – so everyone with an interest in archaeology is encouraged to get involved and cast their votes in the four categories.
Voting closes on 15th February 2013, and the winners will be announced at a special awards ceremony on 1st March at Current Archaeology Live! 2013. Entry to the awards reception is included as part of the ticket for CA Live!, tickets for which are also now available. We will be there to report on the Awards as they happen, via our Twitter account, so make sure you’re following us then if you can’t be there in person.