Ron
Sorry I misinterpreted your stance. It would appear that we are argueing the
same thing, but from different perspectives. I, as an ex-motor mechanic and
machine operator tend to look for natural reasons in the first instance.
Only after these have been eliminated would i then look at behavoural
patterns. This recalls the cautionary tale they used to tell young mechanics
about about the old lady who used to keep coming in complaining how badly
her car ran. The mechanic checked, tuned and tested her car every time and
found nothing wrong until the day he got her to drive the car. She started
it, pulled out the choke, hung her handbag on it and drove off. The younger
archaeologists reading this and brought up on modern cars with automatic
chokes can do there own research on this.
The cats in the program I saw were not embedded in the plaster but rather
trapped in the wall cavity. Still puzzled how you would embed a live cat in
plaster, you would need an extremely strong pair of leather or chain mail
gauntlets I would think.
You may be interested in the transcript of the program and see what you
think. http://www.abc.net.au/tv/rewind/txt/s1218257.htm


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron May" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 3:20 AM
Subject: Re: Ritual concealment or other causes


> John,
>
> You would be wrong to interpret that I see all things buried, embedded, or
> stashed in the building fabric as ritual concealment. In fact, I
challenged John
> Gibbs' buried basement pit because the artifacts were broken. Sure, rats,
> mice, snakes and even lazy people are responsible for things in walls. And
yes,
> association of other objects is important to understanding what you have.
>
> I too am not a kid anymore, by the way. What has that got to do with
> anything? I feel that older people with more life experiences and a
broader mind to
> cultural diversity have a better ability to understand and interpret
features in
> archaeology. That is, unless personal religious or political beliefs
> interfere with an open mind.
>
> American archaeologists in the 1950s-1970s explained everything that was
> unusual as "ritual" and were soundly ridiculed in the 1980s and later.
This
> triggered a knee jerk reaction that virtually nothing could be ritual;
rock art was
> graffitti, etc. When I first posted the hat and boot feature, the most
ardent
> critics of ritual concealment were, in fact, archaeologists who had been
> "pounded into the sand" by the anti-religious critics. There are also some
> fundamental Christians who refuse to believe Americans could practice
pagan rituals in
> America after the Declaration of Independence; or Australians after the
first
> immigrant ship arrived.
>
> I have no idea what you saw on TV. It was your broad denial of the whole
> concept of ritual concealment that caused me to think you fall into the
> anti-religious camp. What you really are, is really of no importance to
me. Please dont
> take this as personal.
>
> The cat and chicken reported from England were embedded in the wall
plaster,
> not simply dead inside a cavity. The grotesque facial expressions of the
cats
> (more than one have been found) were from suffocation and shock. There is
good
> oral history on the use of animals to keep the spirits of vermin under
> control. There is also written history and oral documentation about the
beliefs of
> shoes as objects that could grow a spirit protector in the walls of a
house. My
> point was for you to begin reading on the topic so that you could sort
> concealment from a trash dump. But, of course, you have to have an open
mind and
> accept that other people might not believe as you do.
>
> We all come from diverse backgrounds to arrive in archaeology. I came from
a
> combination of anthropology and public history. Had I been younger, I
might
> have taken up underwater archaeology, as I worked commercial diving in my
youth.
> Your background is different. From conference attendance, I find a wide
range
> of background training that brings people to the field of archaeology and
it
> is all good. Most of my best crew are people whose degrees and life
> experiences were other than anthropology. I just ask that they not judge
the cultures we
> study by our own standards or openly ridicule them for beliefs that are
alien.
>
> I think you can better understand where I am coming from now.
>
> Ron May
> Legacy 106, Inc.