|Go on, read Heritage Action's |
text on what archaeology
is and is not, you know
you want to...
Natasha Ferguson @DrTashaFerguson 4 godziny temuI would say engaging in an academic debate would consist of starting off with defining just what, precisely, we are talking about before being urged to privilege one form of it . Here we see that pernicious and superficial "we aint night'awks' argumint" trotted out by an arkie from the Scottish equivalent of the Treasure Unit.
Come on! Let's not conflate hobbyist and illicit metal detecting #EAAVilnius2016 Academic debate is happening let's engage with it people!
Paul Barford Whether or not it is done in accord with a "they can't touch you for it" law (made by non-archaeologists), surely as archaeologists what we need to be debating is what the overall effect is (a) on the archaeological record and (b) public perceptions and expectations of archaeology (real archaeology). Artefact hunting is NOT archaeology, archaeology (real archaeology) is - or jolly well should be by now - something else. I do not see the archaeological rationale for dividing so-called "hobbyist artefact hunting|" (what exactly does Dr Ferguson mean by that?) from any other kind of collection-driven-exploitation (CDE) of the archaeological record. This blog's comments box is free for any archaeologist to come here and explain to us all just where they draw the line and why. Please, be my guests.
@PortantIssues @DrTashaFerguson @SuzieThomasHY
In what, precise, way do they affect archaeological record differently? Always, Natasha? What is difference?
UPDATE 3rd September 2016 Evening
Dr Ferguson continues her support of artefact hunting. She now ventures:
Natasha Ferguson @DrTashaFerguson 12 minut temuI pointed out that this is by no means always the case, artefact hunting and collecting with metal detectors is illegal over much of continental Europe, which does not mean that artefact hunters do not keep records and are not collecting (illegally) out of an interest in history and always is done to sell rather than collect the objects found. This is well- documented from Austria and Poland and a number of other places which seem to be out of NF's immediate line of sight). Whether that is or is not the case, they are damaging the sites which the artefacts they pocket come from - and that is the point I think underlies this whole debate. On being asked whether she'd like to expand on that in more than 140 characters, the reply is:
@MayaHoole @PortantIssues @SuzieThomasHY Illicit is illegal with intention to profit.
Oh don't worry, I am. Haven't you read my published work? You might find in interesting.I guess this is it. I've read the "Biting the bullet" one, the rest do not turn me on all that much, it seems we are talking at cross purposes (as one often is when the basic terms are not defined properly) Dr F. is talking about the use of the metal detectopr as a survey tool, I am (and this blog is) talking about it as a tool used for the collection-driven exploitation of the archaeological record, as a collector's tool. But yes, feel free Dr Ferguson to come here and tell me I am in some way 'wrong' to see it as such.
Meanwhile one Maya Hoole decided to archiexplain it all to me.We have a BM-dumbdown-compliant definition of "illicit" artefact hunting:
Maya Hoole @MayaHoole 50 minut temuOne wonders what planet Ms Hoole has fallen from. My reply:
@PortantIssues @DrTashaFerguson @SuzieThomasHY Illict = no records or interest in learning: hobbie = keen to share, learn join community.
Rubbish; I asked "always". Check the figures on reporting. Knowledge theft occurs in both cases.UPDATE UPDATE 3rd September 2016 Evening
I assume that this is arkiesarcasm:
Natasha Ferguson @DrTashaFerguson 31 minut temuWhich is why I invited you to come and debate it properly. Why should we not, taking the wider view, treat "hobbyist artefact hunting" and "illicit metal detecting" as part of the same phenomenon which is the collection-driven exploitation of the archaeological record? Yes, there is a socking big "elephant in the senior common room" requiring academic debate, can you see it? Would it hurt to use social (and other) media to whisper a few truths about it?
@PortantIssues @MayaHoole @SuzieThomasHY Fair play to you for being able to tackle the issue in 150 characters. Takes talent...