Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 23 Feb 2001 09:57:08 +0100 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> All of the data is building blocks. As long as small studies are discouraged
> and derided by scholars in & out of academia we will not get the type of
> studies mentioned.
isn't it just like the "problem" with metal detectors, etc.? the english and
portuguese have done some good work in bringing them online: there was a
large-scale systematic beach survey done by metal-detector clubs in portugal:
the archaeologists told them why context, etc., was important, gave lectures,
helped interpret/identify/date the material, etc., and basically encouraged
everyone to be good citizens - and the metal detectorists had fun, learned a
lot, were very happy to write reports, feel they were contributing to the good
of society; gave the stuff the museums wanted and kept the rest...
i also think a lot about some of the historical reenactment societies
(there is even a society here dedicated to maintaining the quality of "medieval
fairs")- i bet a lot of these people have more practical knowledge in the finer
points of daily life in whatever historical period happens to tickle their
particular fancies than most of us will ever know - but how strong is the
impulse to public outreach there?
there will always be some black sheep only in it for the money - just
like there are probably all too many archaeologists interested mainly in buried
treasure - but we can't paint them all the same dark hue -
geoff carver
http://home.t-online.de/home/gcarver/
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|