I agree completely.  With my focus on public archaeology, I probably have
more contact with latent archaeological tendencies than I do with real
professionals.  However as several people have pointed out, we do need to
maintain our professionalism and lots of patients.  It is a real delicate
matter dealing with folks who are obviously not going to respect your
assessment.  I try not to relegate their interpretations as untrue, but try
to open their eyes to alternative perspectives that are at least equally
valid.  I try to understand as much about their perspective as possible and
consider it a possibility and then put forth my interpretation.  Such is the
case with a recent encounter with a dowser.  I had a dowser who was
convinced that he had discovered historic graves at development site, when I
examined the area there was no evidence of graves.  It really helped that we
recently had a discussion about dowsing on this listserv.  I was able to
discuss dowsing with him and explain my methodology.  While I did not
convince him of my perspective, he seemed to have some respect for me and it
was a rather cordial agreement to disagree.

Jay Stottman
Kentucky Archaelogical Survey


----- Original Message -----
From: Henderson, Mark <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 5:12 AM
Subject: Re: Purveyor of an Alternate Reality - Fictional History


> Jay and others- Everytime we do self diagnosis we are substituting our
> lay-person's understanding for a trained physician's expertise. I feel
> quite successful in pointing this out when speaking with individuals and
> groups about archeology and archeological conservation ethics.  I allege
> that everyone is an archeologist, like everyone is doctor. I think it is
> human nature to be interested in our individual and collective past, and
> more certainly it is human nature to be concerned about our personal
> physical well-being.  As a former union representative, I would
> sometimes have to remind my union brothers and sisters of the old addage
> that ' a person who represents himself has a fool for a client.'  As an
> archeologist and as a union representative it is not unusual to have
> people ignore my opinions and advice in areas where I have expertise.
> Who among us has not chosen to ignore "doctor's orders" because we "know
> better."  The physicians I respect the most are the ones that don't feel
> threatened by their patient's self diagnosis, but use what I think is
> this natural human desire for expert knowledge, insight and explanation.
>   What is troubling are the times, as an archeologist where my
> "expertise" has been flawed, after gaining a layperson's confidence in
> that expertise.  More troubling still are the cases where as a Union Rep
> my diagnosis or remedies failed.  I think I know why I wouldn't want to
> be a physician.  What I think about when people are not convinced  that
> my archeological expertise is not what they want to hear (which I think
> arguably is more frequently for those of us in applied contexts than in
> academic settings), I think that often I am fortunate.  Those folks
> probably will never be allies in conservation of resources anyhow, no
> matter how much I invest in trying to advise them.  What is much tougher
> is, as a civil servant, I can not refuse service to any citizen just
> because they "dis" my expertise. Much of my career has been spent in
> generally 'hostile work environments' toward archeology and
> archeologists.  That wears many of us down, but really most of our
> shortfalls don't have the direct dire consequences on another
> individual's well being as a physician's shortcomings in expertise.  And
> we don't pay the high malpractice insurance premiums to prove it.
> Likewise as a union rep I could not refuse to represent anyone who was
> in my bargaining unit. I think one of the weekly themes on the TV show
> ER is a client who the long-suffering competent physician has to do her
> best to serve, but whose client won't voluntarily seek counsel
> elsewhere. At least Bill White's client went away.  So it isn't that
> people are initially anymore dismissive of archeological expertise than
> medical expertise, it is just that they are a lot less forgiving when a
> physician makes an error; and maybe that is as it should be? -Mark
>
> Jay and Beth Stottman wrote:
>
> > People believe what they want to believe.  In my dealings with similar
> > people (which around KY it was the myth of Welsh Prince Madoc), they
> > don't look to us for real help or expertise.  They just want someone
> > with credentials to verify their interpretations, when we don't, they
> > consider us part of a conspiracy.  I will have people argue with me that
> > plain old rocks are artifacts, even when they asked me what they were to
> > begin with.  I usually ask them if they would question their physician
> > on their expertise.  But, for some reason our expertise of cultural
> > materials is just not valid unless we agree with them.  I guess we just
> > have one of those jobs that anyone could do and you really don't need
> > any education for.
> >
> >
> >
> > M. Jay Stottman
> >
> > Kentucky Archaeological Survey
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     ----- Original Message -----
> >
> >     From: William White <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> >
> >     To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> >
> >     Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 11:07 AM
> >
> >     Subject: Purveyor of an Alternate Reality - Fictional History
> >
> >
> >     List Members:
> >
> >
> >
> >     Here is something I would like to share with the list that might
> >     spark discussion of similar encounters.  Enjoy....
> >
> >
> >
> >     Being employed with a research/museum institution under university
> >     affiliation, I am occasionally asked meet with general members of
> >     the public seeking assistance or advise.  One visitor had some
> >     artifacts to show me yesterday that would "rewrite" the history of
> >     the American Revolution.  He informed me that he was the CEO of a
> >     consulting firm for the location of heavy metal resources,
> >     particularly abandoned treasures.  He further stated that he had
> >     recently filed a claim of abandoned property in the Las Vegas
> >     Valley, Nevada, where he had found evidence of a bivouac area and
> >     underground storage bunkers associated with the Continental Army of
> >     George Washington.  He told me that the English Army had plans to
> >     invade the western half of America (then belonging to Spain) by
> >     sailing up the Colorado River and landing troops in the vicinity of
> >     Hoover Dam, a chapter that had been "intentionally" left out of the
> >     history books.
> >
> >
> >
> >     Listening with interest I asked to see his evidence upon which he
> >     produced three locally available limestone rocks recovered from the
> >     property.  The first, he said was a cameo in the likeness of George
> >     carved by one of the troops (there was some
> >     natural resemblance).  The second was a broken fragment of a
> >     Greek discus (yes the Greeks also sailed up the Colorado River).
> >     The last stone was "compressed opium" and when tilted to a
> >     certain angle would reveal a hidden map of the Indus Valley which
> >     has similar characteristics to the Las Vegas Valley.  Pointing to a
> >     hole in the rock, he said that he knew of corresponding cave in the
> >     nearby mountains where he was positive that the real Declaration of
> >     Independence had been stored by B. Franklin.
> >
> >
> >
> >     Neither agreeing or disagreeing with his proposition, I assured him
> >     that the artifacts he was showing me were not consistent with
> >     Revolution-era material objects but were simply limestone rocks.  He
> >     questioned my credentials and I had to admit that I did not have
> >     experience with such artifacts since they were not found outside of
> >     the eastern states. I then asked how I could be of further help?  He
> >     stated that he needed investors and a
> >     university-based archaeological group to take on the excavation of
> >     the bunkers.  I informed him that we were a contractor, firms
> >     hired us to do archaeological work and that we could not be of
> >     assistance to him unless he paid us.  He then stormed out of the
> >     museum yelling that nobody believed him.  Ouch, a touch of reality
> >     there.........
> >