Washngton POST Article on Relic Hunters

[diggummup]

Just because they've been schooled,"we" aren't worthy enough to work alongside them.We don't rate high enough to hold thier trowel as far as they're concerned.We are grave robbers and we destroy history by doing what we do.They on the other hand ,are high and mighty archaeologists with the degree to prove it.Too bad,like you said there could be much to gain if "we" could all just get along.I won't hold my breath though,i'm a realist.
[/quote]

How many of us are amateur archaeologists and how many of us are grave robbers?

Uhh,I believe I was speaking figuratively not literally.Geesh!
I'm not sure what Canewrap meant or was insinuating when he said,referring to the average archie,"He's really a relic hunter who thought he was going straight".Are you implying that we are not straight? What are we,thieves,vandals,grave robbers,what? Explain please.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[BamaBill]

Just because they've been schooled,"we" aren't worthy enough to work alongside them.We don't rate high enough to hold thier trowel as far as they're concerned.We are grave robbers and we destroy history by doing what we do.They on the other hand ,are high and mighty archaeologists with the degree to prove it.Too bad,like you said there could be much to gain if "we" could all just get along.I won't hold my breath though,i'm a realist.
[/quote]
Most archaelogists that feel this way, do so because of the few bad apples that they are aware of. You know, those TH'ers that defile NP battlefields after dark or invade an ongoing dig and rip the guts out of it when no one is around. Most MD'ers are honorable people that always do the right thing. There are a few archaeologists that know this and are actually making use of the MD'ers skills in some cases.

How many of us are amateur archaeologists and how many of us are grave robbers?

Uhh,I believe I was speaking figuratively not literally.Geesh!
I'm not sure what Canewrap meant or was insinuating when he said,referring to the average archie,"He's really a relic hunter who thought he was going straight".Are you implying that we are not straight? What are we,thieves,vandals,grave robbers,what? Explain please.
[/quote]
I was referring to the fact that if you talked to many Archaeologists you'd find out that the lure of finding exciting history (treasure if you will) is what lured them into it in the first place. Many of us (myself included) felt that when we got started we were doing what we loved and possibly contributing to our knowledge of history in a scientific way. As it turns out, you see, most of the Archaelogy in this country is what is referred to as Salvage Archaeology, where laws on the books require a cultural survey to be done on any project that involves government money. Many of these digs are performed by small contract companies that bid on these contracts and where there are small companies, contracts, and bidding there is room for all kinds of monkey business, including the use of unskilled labor, hack and slash recovery methods, etc. It was most of these realizations that made me reconsider being an Archaeologist. Don't get me wrong, there are legitimate organizations doing some top notch work, but they can difficult and next to impossible to join or stay in unless you have a Doctorate in some obscure aspect and as I mentioned before, funding is usually on a shoestring and near impossible to get. Because of the low pay and oftentimes political climate created when trying to compete for funding, it can stress the patience of even the most dedicated professional to point that they may feel threated by someone they see as merely a treasure hunter that has no regard for the important scientific work they're doing. I'm not trying to defend the Archaelogist, just trying to give some background to what my experiences were when I was one. As a side note, to give you an idea of how lopsided it was when I was working in the field, I'll cite an example. I was running a crew of about 8 people on a prehistoric dig over in Maryland, when I was assigned somebody that didn't have the requisite field experience for her credentials. Turned out she was PhD and I didn't even have a degree of any kind, but my 8 years of experience made me her boss. Guess how that sat with her?

 

[cavers5]

I, too, am an archaeologist and believe me, I met some "bad" archaeologists. They were not truly interested in history, only in protecting their jobs, reputations (which were not deserved based on merit, but their political maneuvering and outright b.s.) and making as much money as they could. Their public persona was the best acting I've ever seen and I saw a lot of it! It was sickening. I am not currently working in the field (because of health reasons), and there are very few archaeologists that I met and got to know well enough to miss and have respect for. If my health returns enough that I can practice/teach anthropology/archaeology, I want somebody from this forum to personally visit me and kick me in the a?? if I ever cross over to the "bad archaeologist side!"

Metal detectors are technology and better technology should always be applied in the field as much as possible. I think detector users should always be allowed to volunteer for (historic) digs (it is free labor!), unless they prove themselves not to be trusted. Granted, if I was running a dig and using th'ers and one of them stole an artifact and I was able to prove it (cameras or whatnot), then I have no problem with prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the legal law and our own hillbilly laws (I am from Kentucky and feuding is in my blood.) On the other hand, I love to get out and metal detect for fun. I was detecting before I was an archaeologist. It's a great sport and hobby. Walking a middle line between th'ers and detectorists is a hard chore, but it should be done.

Cavers5

 

[roswellborn]

IMHO the really sad thing is how much there could be to gain both historically and monetarily on both sides if everyone could just put aside their petty differences and work together - but alas, I tend to always be on the side of "can't we all just get along?" That mantra just doesn't cut it these days :-(

The above, and canewrap (keep wanting to type "canebreak" sheesh) and Cavers5 - thank you!

It seems to me, there are "good" archies and not-so-hot archies (in it for personal gain/glory), and the same goes for the detectorists. Trouble is, the only evidence the archaeologist sees from MDers is from the bad ones. The good MDers don't leave holes around, they respect private property and most have a love of history (or figuring out puzzles, at least). They aren't going to raze a mound to the ground. They have a respect for what it is they've found (except maybe pulltabs lol).

I read an article once about an MDer who started documenting the bullets he was finding on private ground, next to a battlefield (Civil War). What kind of bullet, where each type was found and how many (there were LOTS!) What he learned - because he documented! - was that this hillside was receiving Union bullets, thus-and-such hump of land was being fired on from somewhere else, that little valley was firing in (whatever) direction... stuff like that.

What he found actually revised some of what was known about that battle. And all because he documented what was found where. Gee. Almost like the archies! (I have got to find that article!)

MDers and archaeologists really could learn things from each other, if we could just quit taking potshots at each other! Agreed, some of each "camp" are never going to agree; but some of us could - if we'd just give it a chance. What about an MD club inviting an anthropology or archaelogy professor from the local community college to give a talk about "how to document"?

Or better yet! Invite the prof from that college to a MDer Club meeting - introduce him to the "good MDers" eh? And then, once he's seen that MD folks really are spiffy people, then ask for a talk about preservation of relics - or how to document - something they say "we" don't do. Once that one prof has seen the "good guy" Mder, he might be more willing to listen, y'know?

It's a thought. And it would be a start.

HH
Nan

Just thought of this - the MDer may find the relics and learn about the history of a place - but only he and his buddies and family (generally) will get the benefit of that knowledge. The archaeologist does have the means to make this knowledge known to a lot more people than the regular Joe MDer.

 

[BamaBill]

Thank you Roswellborn, this exactly the type of discussion I was hoping to spark. I think your idea of having an Archaeologist come talk to a MD Meeting has a tremendous amount of merit and I hope someone takes the idea and runs with it. Because, as you pointed out the average MDer only has his or her family as an audience when its revealed what he/she has found and what they know about it. Where the pro could potentially have a bigger audience if the community could become aware and provide some funding to make it happen.

 

[cavers5]

Sorry, folks, the last line of my previous post should have read "between th'ers and archaeologists!"

I don't know if I agree with what was mentioned above about the dispersing of public info. Actually, I think that the average metal detectorist provides more useful info to the public than the average pro arch.

The pros tend to attend professional conferences and publish academic works that bore the general public to death when they try to read it. A lot of people (the general public) don't want to read about how the statistical results came about, they just want to know the results. Of course, I'm stating this based on my own personal observations which are regionally limited.

A good detectorist recites his finds in story format, thus making it more memborable for the listening recipients. The detectorist may be talking to family and friends, but they, in turn, also talk to other people, so the general public gains more from the good detectorist (I think.) Granted, he/she may or may not publish a book, but they are recognized locally and/or regionally, etc. as having some knowledge about the artifacts, provenience, and history.

In my opinion, that's priceless, worth a whole heck of a lot more than some "stupid-educated" archaeologist coming off his/her lofty perch to state authoritatively and most certainly, without argument, that such-and-such artifact is "ca-blah, ca-blah, ca-blah! Take whatever your archaeologist tells you with a grain of salt. He/she may or may not be right! Find out for yourself!

Archaeology combined with historical research is a very exciting field. I'm not saying that there aren't good academic professionals out there, because I actually met some that did care and truly enjoyed what they were doing. There are also great published academic works if you can understand the terminology and math. On the other hand, I also met the b.s. cutthroats that truly sickened me.

Sometimes I think it would be nice if the laws of the Old West could be applied! "Application Old West 101!" That would be a great class!

Cavers5