qwrftweg4agaew eargerherh errrgweg

The reading and the lecture are both about the priority of archaeological studies in the twentieth century's Britain. The author of the article feels that in twentieth century, archaeological studies got fewer priority than ever. The lecturer disputes the claims made in the lecture. According to the reading, many sites which have archaeological importance had been destroyed due to construction projects. The specific argument is challenged by the author. He claims that the new guidelines of the twentieth century had forced construction company to examine whether there is any archaeological importance of the construction site before starting the construction. Additionally, If there is any importance, then construction company had to make plans regarding that. Secondly, the author suggests financial supports were insufficient for doing archaeological research in twentieth century. The lecturer, however, asserts that other than the government's support, construction companies also did funding for research. Hence, It gave more scope to do research in twentieth century other than past. Finally, the author posits that archaeologist were living there profession for not getting enough scope and remunation. In contrast, the lecturer's stance is according to new guidelines, as construction companies had to do archaeological research before construction, they needed more archaeologist for the entire process. Therefore, jobs were increased for archaeologists in twentieth than before.