Again, I'm posting the following for Adrian, who's been having e-mail trouble:
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
 
In response to my post, Matt CIM wrote:
>I won't sit here and blow smoke up your ass.
 
Well that's a relief, Matt. I may live in the San Francisco area but I'm
way too conservative for that kind of, ah, action.
 
>About two years into college, $20,000 later
>I realized I wasn't learning anything that I hadn't read or digested in
>some form already.
 
Does it matter to me that friend Matt doesn't  have a university degree?
Not really (although as an academic I hope others don't follow his example
or I'll be out of a job!). I've got enough degrees to know that the
possession of one or two doesn't guarantee much. My old boss, Dave
Fredrickson, used to say that if someone has a degree one assumes that they
can do the job until l they demonstrate that they can't; if they don't, one
assumes the reverse. Words of wisdom.
 
Coming from the UK, I learned archaeology by doing it and only got around
to getting some letters after my name after I had directed several
archaeological excavations --- directed, written up the report, and curated
the artifacts where others could study them, I should say. And that's my
point. If treasure salvors and their terrestrial colleagues (I won't use
the "P" word) did these things too I would welcome them into the
archaeological fold. It's the fact that they destroy/sell the
archaeological evidence while they are having their fun that puts them
outside the pale and why all our professional societies of codes of ethics.
Perhaps Matt doesn't work that way. If so, I apologize for misrepresenting
him.
 
Regards to all in HISTARCH land from sunny California,
 
Adrian Praetzellis