I am rather mystified by his remark:
"Relic Hunters are responsible for hundreds of books and articles on the
minutia of camplife, battlefield troop positions, equipment, etc. I have
yet to see one book emanating from professional archaeological field digs.
Not one book. Not even an article."
Obviously he hasn't looked very hard. Granted most of the published works
would not be found in one's local library, but a quick search of the
Internet or a trip down to a full-service bookstore would locate countless
references readily available to the public on subjects to which he is
devoted. He alludes to collaboration between the NPS and relic collectors,
and indeed metal-detecting groups have worked closely with archeologists as
volunteers on many a battlefield project. You might tell your correspondent
that there's at least four books available at Amazon.com by Doug Scott on
projects he accomplished with such collaboration at the Little Bighorn
Battlefield in Montana.
Randy
Lichtenberger To: [log in to unmask]
<Randy@POPLARFORE cc: (bcc: Vergil Noble/MWAC/NPS)
ST.ORG> Subject: Relic Hunting Dialogue Anyone?
Sent by:
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY
<[log in to unmask]
>
09/10/04 08:27 AM
AST
Please respond to
HISTORICAL
ARCHAEOLOGY
All,
I received the following rant last night from one of the "authors" who
participated in "Diggin' in Virginia I." The full text of his email along
with my response follows. Comments?
Randy
>From: "Steve Sylvia" <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Diggin In Virginia
>Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 15:24:42 -0400
>
>Mr. Lichtenberger,
>
>I read a posting you made recently regarding Diggin' in Virginia. It
>seemed evident to me that you are unaware of the circumstances
>surrounding the event. I am keenly aware of the depredations made by a
>selfish and criminal element within the ranks of relic hunters. Such an
>element should not define the whole. I am sure there is an unsavory
>element within the ranks of professional archaeologists also. The dark
>side of human nature will rear its ugly head regardless of profession.
>However, to condemn all relic hunters, as most of your profession are
>wont to do, is quite vexing to those of us in the majority. (I don't
>believe today's archaeologists would care to be defined by the illegal
>and immoral undertakings of those who have pillaged Egypt's tombs for
>over a century.)
>
>Your recent post is a case in point. It seems that, in your zeal to
>disparage all relic hunting activities, you are willing to forsake the
>very tenets which rule your own profession-research, investigation,
>examination, evaluation, etc. Had you performed those you would have
>discovered that this particular event was a salvage operation. The
>three acres involved were on the cusp of development. The dig was
>conducted several weeks prior to total destruction by developers. The
>entire site is now gone-bulldozed, landscaped, and built upon.
>
>Our efforts resulted in identifying the occupants (4th Michigan Inf.),
>identifying the time and duration of occupancy (fall 1862-spring 1863),
>mapping the camp layout and hut positions via GPS, and the recovery and
>recording of hundreds of artifacts. Furthermore, several professional
>archaeologists were involved in the effort. They offered advice and
>assistance with several aspects of the dig. The results of the dig were
>written and published in North South Trader's Civil War magazine.
>
>Your threat to alert the Virginia archaeological community of this
>"depredation" would prove embarrassing to you once the facts were
>known--facts that you should have availed yourself of before ringing an
>alarm bell.
>
>Your concern with "high dollar" relic hunting is also not pertinent to
>this particular event. The organization sponsoring this event is a
>non-profit outfit. The amateurs actually paid to dig in the rain for
>three days in order to "buy" permission from the landowner to descend on
>his property.
>
>Archaeology is a paid profession. Our only pay is the pleasure derived
>from recovery itself. Granted, the relics have monetary value, but the
>value of the relics against the time involved for recovery would equate
>to about a dollar an hour. I'm sure you make more than that!
>
>I realize that your methodology is archaic, pardon the pun, for the
>purposes of salvage archaeology-you can't excavate three acres of hut
>sites in three days with garden trowels and toothbrushes-but you might
>consider the enormous benefit derived in such situations by us amateurs
>with our demonic metal detectors. We, as a group, have contributed
>greatly to the pool of knowledge about the Civil War. Relic hunters are
>responsible for hundreds of books and articles on the minutia of camp
>life, battlefield troop positions, equipment, etc. I have yet to see
>one book emanating from professional archaeological field digs. Not one
>book. Not even an article.
>
>I, for one, would certainly be interested in a dialogue with someone
>such as you for the purpose of clarifying motives and, most important,
>results. Perhaps, one day, a collaborative effort such as those with
>the National Park Service could be effected between us amateurs and you
>professionals here in Virginia.
>
>Stephen W. Sylvia
>
>Publisher
>
>North South Trader's Civil War magazine
My response 9/10/04
Mr. Sylvia,
I am glad that my recent posting on the subject of "Diggin' in
Virginia" has come to your attention. I would hope that my opinion on the
matter and that of my professional colleagues and the ethical amateur
archaeologists whom we work closely with will soon come to the attention of
all of the folks involved in the "DIV" events. Frankly, despite your
vigorous defense of DIV I, I am still appalled by the whole thing. Your
argument is faulty on so many levels I literally don't have time to refute
them all. I honestly wish I did because it would amuse me to no end...but
anyway. A few basic things do need to be said.
First, to try to legitimize this giant treasure hunt by calling it
"salvage archaeology" doesn't work. It's just putting lipstick on a pig.
I
don't need to know anymore about DIV than I learned from the event
photographs and postings on their message board to know that it was
unethical by any reasonable archaeological standards. Comparing relic
hunting to archaeology is a non-starter that undermines most of the rest of
your argument. The only thing they have in common is the shovel.
Second, while I don't dispute your argument that some of the
participants are in it for their love of history, there are many others who
are there for the "loot." Most of the discussion on the DIV message board
revolves around how many goodies are going to be found, not what
contribution it will make to the study of Civil War history. As
archaeologists are fond of saying "It's not what you find, it's what you
find out." I don't see a lot of this at play there. And for those relic
hunters with a heart of gold who simply want to help preserve the past, put
away your metal detector and send your DIV entrance fee to a group like the
Archeological Society of Virginia (www.asv-archeology.org) a non-profit
amateur archaeology group that could do some real good with it.
As for your claim that "several professional archaeologists were
involved in the effort," here's their invitation to step out into the
light,
show their credentials and tell exactly what they did at DIV I. Your peers
would like a word with you.
Before you crack open your thesaurus for a reply, there's a lot of
great reading out there for you to look at that was produced by
professional
archaeologists. It includes many thousands of books, articles and
particularly useful in this case, ethics guidelines. You won't find them
between the covers of "North South Trader's Civil War Magazine" but a quick
internet search should do the trick.
Randy M. Lichtenberger
|
