Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 14 Oct 2006 18:24:47 -0400 |
MIME-version: |
1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-transfer-encoding: |
7bit |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
No I think what he is saying is that if only archaeologists use our
data we are marginalized and unimportant. Assuming David is right,
and I have certainly seen evidence that archaeology is ignored by
many historians, there are a number of possible reasons:
1- We are not marketing our product very well. This assumes that we
have something to offer the other disciplines and they just have not
recognized it yet.
2- The other disciplines have examined what we do and have decided it
is useless for their purposes. In which case perhaps we need to look
at "repackaging".
3- The other disciplines are stupid, or blinkered. While the later is
certainly true of some practitioners, I find it difficult to believe
that it is true of entire disciplines that could make use of
archaeologically derived data. On the other hand I recently read a
"scholarly" work on the use of slaves in the American iron industry.
The author managed to get a considerable amount of both the
historical background and technology wrong. While he acknowledge the
assistance of a veritable who's who of historians, he didn't bother
to consult any archaeometallurgists.
4- We aren't especially relevant. Something I am loath to admit, as I
have spent a considerable part of my life as an archaeologist. But if
true this may be attributable to a number of causes, including that
we have marginalized ourselves. And all of us will have to admit that
there have been lots of papers we have sat through and articles we
have tried to read that were pretty irrelevant.
James Brothers, RPA
[log in to unmask]
On Oct 14, 2006, at 13:18, Ron May wrote:
> So, the gist of what you are saying, David, is that because Nobel
> Prize
> winning scholars do not use our archaeology data that we are
> marginalized and
> unimportant? Is this what you are saying?
>
> Ron May
> Legacy 106, Inc.
|
|
|