Although it is true that archaeology is not essential to survival, it is a
mistake to say that the public does not benefit from publically funded
archaeology. Hundreds of thousands of people visit National Monuments,
Historic Parks, and National Parks that either center around
archaeological sites and ruins, or where interpretation is informaed by
previous archaeology. We don't need public art, fountains, or parks to
live either, but people enjoy and actually demand them. I know that much
of archaeology done with public funds is rutine, but if we do a better job
at sharing our results through lectures, exhibits, and especially
publications written for the public then we justify the federal and state
tax dollars that are spent on archaeology each year. Archaeology in
general is for the public--but archaeologists working with public funding
are especially obligated to make their results known. If only every phase
three excavation came with the obligation and the FUNDING to publish
a anciliary book, brochure, video, etc. for the public, it would be harder
for people to claim that publically funded archaeology did not benefit the
people who paid for it.

Margo

On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, William White wrote:

> List Members:
>
> Bob Schuyler recently stated, in part, "American society, or any other, does not need archaeology to survive so in some absolute sense all of out profession is a waste of tax money as is most of social science and historical scholarship, not to mention the humanities."   This reminds me of a statement made by one of my close associates, a Federal archaeologist, reflecting this same sentiment.  To paraphrase, "If reporters from 48-HOURS or 60-MINUTES were to follow me or any other archaeologist around to see what we really do, we would all be looking for new jobs."  Indeed!
>