Jim's argument is blatantly Ameri-centric, and also ignores the fact that
many states require the use of the metric system (the Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation, for example).  In the era of the internet and
world-wide e-publishing, it is ridiculous to be arguing that we should
forego English for metric, because Americans can only understand English.  I
personally hope that my work is being read beyond the US, and I would like
Candadian or European or whatever readers to be able to understand my
measurements without needing a conversion chart.

It does not matter which type of ruler you use, all responsible
archaeologists should consistently include both measurement systems in their
reports.  If everybody did this, metric vs. English would be a non-issue for
archaeologists.

Chris Espenshade

-----Original Message-----
From: James G. Gibb [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 1:09 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: centimeter scales


Mike's point regarding the units of measure used by the people we study
is well taken, but I add a fundamental and inescapable fact overlooked
by those retorting that we might use cubits as well: rank and file
Americans predominantly use English standard. Throwing metric
measurements at engineers in technical reports or at readers of
newspaper and historical society journal articles mystifies rather than
enlightens. And it is not the job of archaeologists to convert US
citizens to an international system of measurement. Now, should the
powers at large want to talk about increasing funding, pay, and benefits
for archaeologists, then perhaps there is room for negotiation.
Jim Gibb
Annapolis, MD