Now that we have "resolved" the question of anthropology v. history
     (thanks, Bob), let's get back to the real world.

     Many will recall an earlier post from me concerning the now-notorious
     syndicated medical columnist Dr. Peter Gott.  Months ago he answered a
     letter concerning potential health risks of digging in privies and
     suggested that the person stop bothering with the mid-20th-century
     sites and get into some of the really good 19th-century farmsteads.
     Someone else was kind enough to post the full text of his column on
     HISTARCH.

     Well, I said at the time I was going to write "Dear Dr. Gott" and give
     him what for, which I did.  Yesterday, some of you may have seen his
     rejoinder (interestingly enough, though I recognize some of my own
     words, parts of the "letter" he answers are not familiar, so he must
     have combined the texts of several while cutting out some of the
     really important stuff).  Here 'tis:

     =========May 17, 2000======

        Dear Dr. Gott:  In a recent column about digging privies, you
     suggested that while this practice would not ordinarily be a health
     hazard, your reader would be better off seeking artifacts from really
     old sources, such as turn-of-the-century privies.
        Shame on you.  Your :advice" will serve no other purpose but to
     diminish our nation's finite, nonrenewable cultural resources.  All in
     the name of fun and profit.
       We archaeologists have suffered decades of frustration because of
     rank amateurs [not my term] with shovels, who up and tear their way
     across the country, taking what they want and leaving behind disturbed
     sites that lose their value to teach new archaeologists about the
     past.  I insist that you print a retraction.

       Dear Reader:  If you believe that 20th century privies are a
     cultural resource, God bless you.  Your orientation is marvelously
     unique.  I thought that privies were simply sites for human waster
     disposal.
       Actually, the reader was merely inuqiring about the possibility of
     becoming sick from digging old privies.  In my answer, I state the
     older the site, the less the chances of health consequences [not
     true].  I had no intention of opening a Pandora's box about amateur
     archaeology.
       But now that you raise the issue, do you really think that
     privy-digging is a threat to our national heritage?  I doubt that
     anything significant would have been put into a privy.  Most
     interesting memorabilia were destined for the trash heap.  Give me a
     break.  Sorry, no retraction.

     ==========


     Dr. Gott is a clear case of someone educated beyond his intelligence
     if ever there was one.  Not only does he just not get it, and
     contradicts himself at every turn, he is totally misrepresenting his
     original column, wherein he clearly stated there was no risk even in
     1950s privy fill.  I didn't say "the practice would not ordinarily a
     health hazard" in my letter, because he did not qualify his statement.

     So I guess another letter is in order.  Anyone care to join me?  I
     think a pile-on is in order this time.

     Dr. Peter Gott
     Newspaper Enterprise Assn.
     200 madison Ave.
     New York, NY 10016


     [log in to unmask]