No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Intellectual Property in Developer-Funded Archaeology Projects in Britain from the Roman Period
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2025
Abstract
As the leading journal for studies of Roman Britain for over 50 years, Britannia has proved a successful publishing outlet for papers that have arisen from the UK developer-funded archaeology sector. This level of interest should encourage the sector to submit more papers to Britannia, but it could also encourage influential journals to improve inclusivity in the publishing traditions of the sector, which are discussed in terms of a widespread failure to acknowledge intellectual property and expertise and to encourage wider involvement in analysis and publishing. The authors use three case studies from their own areas of work to illustrate current problems surrounding authorship, leadership and gendered practice. We then propose ways in which these issues could be tackled.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies.
References
Aitchison, K. 2017: Survey of Archaeological Specialists 2016–17, Edinburgh, https://landward.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Survey_Archaeological_Specialists_201617.pdf (accessed 1 July 2025).Google Scholar
Aitchison, K., German, P. and Rocks-Macqueen, D. 2021: Profiling the Profession, Edinburgh, https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14333387 (accessed 1 July 2025).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aitchison, K., Aitchison, G. and Rocks-Macqueen, D. 2022: Understanding Models for the Delivery of Local Government Archaeological Services, Landward Research Report, https://www.algao.org.uk/publications/2022/understanding-models-delivery-local-authority-archaeology-services (accessed 12 March 2023).Google Scholar
Andrew, J., Bryan, J. and Watson, S. 2020: Getting our House in Order: Archaeologists’ Responses to Prospect’s Workplace Behaviours Survey, Unpub. document available to Prospect members only.Google Scholar
Andrew, A., Bandiera, O., Costa Dias, M. and Landais, C. 2021: The Careers and Time Use of Mothers and Fathers, Institute of Fiscal Studies, https://ifs.org.uk/inequality/the-careers-and-time-use-of-mothers-and-fathers/ (accessed 12 March 2023).Google Scholar
Brunache, P., Dadzie, B.E., Goodlett, K., Hampden, L., Khreisheh, A., Ngonadi, C.V., Panikh, D. and Plummer Sires, J. 2021: ‘Contemporary archaeology and anti-racism: a manifesto from the European Society of Black and Allied Archaeologists’, European Journal of Archaeology 24.3, .10.1017/eaa.2021.21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattermole, A. 2017: ‘Review of the standard of reporting on archaeological artefacts in England’, unpub. report for the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, funded by Historic England, https://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/2024-12/CIfA-HE-Reporting-of-Archaeological-Artefacts-Standard-Review.pdf (accessed 1 July 2025).Google Scholar
CBA (Council for British Archaeology) 2024: Trowel and Error: Figuring Out the Past Together Through Archaeology, Trowel and Error Council for British Archaeology, archaeologyuk.orgGoogle Scholar
CIfA (Chartered Institute for Archaeologists) n.d. Planning and Archaeology: Evidence from the Archaeology and Planning Case Studies Project how and why the system works, https://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/2025-02/CIfA-Planning-and-Archaeology-Case-Studies-Project-Evidence.pdf#:~:text=This%20document%20presents%20the%20key%20messages%20from%20the,the%20planning%20system%20need%20to%20include%20equivalent%20provisions (accessed 1 July 2025).Google Scholar
Cobb, H. 2015: ‘A diverse profession? Challenging inequalities and diversifying involvement in British archaeology’, in Everill, P. and Irving, P. (eds), Rescue Archaeology: Foundations for the Future, Hereford, .Google Scholar
Cobb, H. and Crellin, R.J. 2022: Affirmation and action: a posthumanist feminist agenda for archaeology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 32.2, .10.1017/S0959774321000573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coltofean-Arizancu, L., Gaydarska, B., Plutniak, S., Mary, L., Hlad, M., Algrain, I., Pasquini, B., Vandevelde, S., Stamataki, E., Janežič, P., Wouters, B. and Sengeløv, A. 2023: ‘Harassment, assault, bullying and intimidation (HABI) in archaeology: a Europe-wide survey’, Antiquity 97, .10.15184/aqy.2023.58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cultural Associates Oxford 2023: Qualitative inequalities research for the archaeology sector, Final report for CIfA, https://www.archaeologists.net/sites/default/files/2023-12/CIfA-QIR-Archaeology-Sector-Report.pdf (accessed 1 July 2025).Google Scholar
Dempsey, K. 2019: ‘Gender and Medieval archaeology: storming the castle’, Antiquity 93, .10.15184/aqy.2019.13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz-Guardamino, M. 2024: ‘Gender in digital archaeology in Europe and North America’, in Matić, U., Gaydarska, B., Coltofean, L. and Díaz-Guardamino, M. (eds), Gender Trouble and Current Archaeological Debates, Cham, 47–60.10.1007/978-3-031-68157-8_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulkerson, T.J. and Tushingham, S. 2019: ‘Who dominates the discourses of the past? Gender, occupational affiliation, and multivocality in North American archaeology publishing’, American Antiquity 84, .10.1017/aaq.2019.35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanscam, E. and Witcher, R. 2023: ‘Women in antiquity: an analysis of gender and publishing in a global archaeology journal’, Journal of Field Archaeology 48.2, 87–101.10.1080/00934690.2022.2143896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, K. 2019: Demographics of the Finds Group and results of our survey, conference paper at The Finds Group at 30, Chartered Institute of Archaeologists day conference, 25 September 2019, https://archaeologists.net/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=31Google Scholar
Hawkins, K. 2023: ‘Why study Roman pottery? Surely the men have done it all already?’ Journal of Roman Pottery Studies 20, 25–36.Google Scholar
Heath-Stout, L. 2020: ‘Who writes about archaeology? An intersectional study of authorship in archaeological journals, American Antiquity 85.3, .10.1017/aaq.2020.28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, P.S. 2022: ‘Examining gender disparities in computational archaeology publications: a case study in the Journal of Computational Applications in Archaeology and the Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology Conference Proceedings’, Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology 5.1, .10.5334/jcaa.84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamash, Z. 2021: ‘Rebalancing Roman archaeology: from disciplinary inertia to decolonial and inclusive action’, Theoretical Roman Archaeology Journal 4.1.4, 1–41.10.16995/traj.4330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OASIS 2023: Blogs, https://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/blog/oasis/ (accessed 10 April 2023).Google Scholar
Pope, R. 2021: ‘Modern Women of the Past? Unearthing Gender & Antiquity’, at Women in the Present, Women in the Past, Keynote/Plenary by Invitation Talk/Lecture, University of Sydney, 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJe6388wmSY (accessed 1 July 2025).Google Scholar
Pope, R. and Davies, M. 2023: ‘Peggy Piggott: women and British archaeology (1930–1945)’, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 42, .10.1111/ojoa.12275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rocks-Macqueen, D. and Lewis, B. 2019: Archaeology in Development Management: Its contribution in England, Scotland and Wales, https://www.algao.org.uk/publications/2019/archaeology-development-management-its-contribution-england-scotland-wales (accessed 1 July 2025).Google Scholar
Scott, E. 1998: ‘Tales from a Romanist: a personal view of archaeology and “equal opportunities”’, Theoretical Roman Archaeology Journal, .10.16995/TRAC1997_138_147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Surana, S. and Hawkins, K. in prep: Participation of Women in the Sussex Archaeological Collections, 1950–2012.Google Scholar
Swift, E.V. 2007: ‘Small objects, small questions? Perceptions of finds research in the academic community’, in Willis, S. and Hingley, R. (eds), Roman Finds: Context and Theory, Oxford, 18–28.Google Scholar
Swift, E.V. 2016: ‘The development of artefact studies’, in Millett, M., Revell, L. and Moore, A. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Roman Britain, Oxford, 63–94.Google Scholar
TRAJ 2023: TRAJ Author Guidelines. https://traj.openlibhums.org/site/author-guidelines/ (accessed 28 December 2023).Google Scholar
UK Government 2008: Crossrail Act, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/18/contentsGoogle Scholar
Watson, S. 2019: ‘Trowelblazers: the contribution of women to the archaeology of London’, in Ridgeway, V., Briscoe, D., Hall, J. and Wallower, B. (eds), Fifty Years of London’s Archaeology: Papers from the 50th Anniversary Conference of London Archaeologist, London, 57–62.Google Scholar
Wiseman, R., Neil, B. and Mazzilli, F. 2021: ‘Extreme justice: decapitations and prone burials in three late Roman cemeteries at Knobb’s Farm, Cambridgeshire’, Britannia 52, .10.1017/S0068113X21000064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson et al. supplementary material
Watson et al. supplementary material
File
97.1 KB