Reburial in the context of development: Approaches to reburial in the English planning process

Abstract

Rescue archaeology in England is now firmly embedded in the planning process, following the introduction by the UK government of Planning Policy Guidance Note 16 in 1990 (PPG 16; Departmentof the Environment. Planning Policy Guidance Note 16 — Archaeology and Planning. HMSO, London (1990)). The basic premise of PPG 16 is a strong preference for in situ preservation of nationally important archaeological remains. This often includes reburial of archaeology prior to construction activity, once it has been exposed in test-pitting (‘evaluations’) or full excavation. Reburial strategies are often prepared by civil engineers and there appears to be an overemphasis on consideration of the potential physical impacts on the archaeology. These strategies usually include the use of geotextiles and sand, or other graded material, chosen for its particular particle size/shape characteristics. A greater awareness of the chemical and physical characteristics of a burial environment is now required to ensure that reburial is effective. Archaeologists and conservators are beginning to consider both the natural and, increasingly, the ‘man-made’ (industrial, domestic and agricultural) changes to the soil chemistry of an archaeological site. More use needs to be made of the potential information ‘locked up’ in the artefactual material retrieved from evaluations and excavation nearby. An assessment of the degree of preservation of material should be an integral component for the design of a reburial strategy.