You are currently browsing the daily archive for 10/12/2012.
by Sandy Gerrard
I recently received an e-mail from English Heritage asking me if they could reveal to someone that I had asked for Bosiliack prehistoric settlement to be scheduled. It’s no secret and I am happy to admit to anyone that it was indeed Bosiliack that launched this mini-series of scheduling articles. Bosiliack is an incredibly important monument and it would appear that English Heritage agree, as it has now been added to the Schedule of Ancient Monuments.
The alarming thing about the English Heritage letter was that it stated:
“English Heritage has received a request for the release of the identity of the listing applicant for Bosiliack prehistoric settlement. I am writing to you because I understand from our Local Office that you requested that we consider the property for listing.”
So English Heritage who are the heritage designation experts still seem incapable of telling the difference between listing and scheduling. I asked for the site to be scheduled and this is what has happened, so why call me the listing applicant and the monument as “the property for listing”? Why is it that England’s leading heritage organisation seems unable to tell the difference? Does it matter that EH can’t tell the difference between scheduling and listing? Do these constant failings on the part of the organisation imply some form of deep seated problem with the archaeological element of their role?
The evidence is certainly piling up to indicate that all is not well within Designation Department at EH. We are all capable of making the odd mistake, but EH appears to have taken this to a new level where mistakes are becoming the norm.
[For other articles in the series put Scheduling in the search box]