It’s not hard to see why things like public talks in which people recount their metal detecting experiences strike discordant notes when billed as part of the Festival of British Archaeology. Or why the Finds Days run by PAS stick out in the event listings like an embarrassing sore thumb. It’s simple – activity that doesn’t conform to archaeological ethics or aims isn’t Archaeology and no words can make it otherwise.
But what about dowsers being part of the Festival? Whatters? Dowsers! People who believe they can sense the presence of buried archaeological features. Surprisingly, they’ll be making a number of appearances. Of course, they’re not the acquisitive lot, they have nothing but good motives towards archaeology. Trouble is though (and this is the only criticism of them) they haven’t persuaded most people they can really do it.
So here’s the problem: at a time when it’s vital to convince the public of the importance of Archaeology and the need for it to be adequately funded, they are being sent a message about how it embraces both dodgy ethics and a minority view of the nature of reality! Archaeology ought to be a broad church alright, but not as broad as that surely if it wants funding? Not when politicians up and down the country are struggling to justify paying for it (see Rescue’s map of the cuts for confirmation). Shouldn’t the only message being broadcast by archaeologists be that Archaeology, whether professional or amateur, is an activity that is conducted in a professional manner? Why would the hard-pressed public put its hand in its pocket to support it otherwise? Would you?




17 comments
Comments feed for this article
27/06/2012 at 10:25
Claire
Have you got a link to the festival you could post up please?
27/06/2012 at 11:35
heritageaction
Hi Claire, here it is – http://festival.britarch.ac.uk/
27/06/2012 at 11:43
Claire
I can’t see what the fuss is about. It looks like a very good way of engaging the public and I for one shall be taking my children along to one of their organized days in the hope that they can get a feel for what archaeology is all about. If archaeology wants government funding then then the public needs to be able to see the value of what their money goes towards and this is a good way of doing that, rather than letting archaeology be a ‘behind the scenes’ activity that it used to be.
27/06/2012 at 11:46
Danny
Ummmm, isn’t that exactly what the article was recommending?!
27/06/2012 at 13:34
Claire
“Ummmm, isn’t that exactly what the article was recommending?!”
The article describes it as ‘dodgy’ archaeology? What is dodgy about getting the public (and kids) interested in history and archaeology?
Surely it is a good thing to open archaeology to the public and let them see what it is all about and to get the public to engage with the subject and to get them involved. Who knows, it might inspire and produce a future Mick Aston or two!!
27/06/2012 at 14:46
Danny
“Surely it is a good thing to open archaeology to the public and let them see what it is all about”
Indeed.
And a vital part of that process of course is ensuring that they understand what it ISN’T about, as I’m sure you’ll agree.
27/06/2012 at 14:52
Claire
Well if you tell people what it is all about, it is logical that they know what it is not about. When I passed my driving test, I was smart enough to work out that it doesn’t mean I can fly an aircraft !
Give the general population credit for the fact they are not as naive as you seem to believe them to be!!
27/06/2012 at 15:09
heritageaction
“Well if you tell people what it is all about, it is logical that they know what it is not about.”
Indeed, and that’s precisely the point the article made! The Festival listings include things that ARE archaeology and things that aren’t. People can only be properly informed if that which isn’t archaeology isn’t presented as if it IS. Finally, we’re agreed.
27/06/2012 at 17:11
Claire
Well can someone please tell me what isn’t archaeology from the events listing?. Having seen pictures of kids dressed as roman soldiers, true this is not pure archaeology (or is it?) but at least it brings children and adults closer to history and gets them interested. Are we to believe that dressing up and battle re-enactment is ‘dodgy’?
Without the general public showing an interest in history, archaeology serves no one but those that dig for the past and creates lengthy scholarly documents that are only read by those that dig. Archaeology NEEDS the public ‘on side’ to allow funding that then allows the public to see what history is all about and hopefully to take an interest in it, thus furthering the allocation of yet more funds.
Without the public being engaged in history, archeology could be seen as nothing more than a quaint hobby enjoyed by a few.
Lastly, we have NOT agreed on anything at all (to agree takes 2 parties in common consensus) as you have yet to explain what ISN’T archaeology. I would like you to expand on this and tell me what you believe isn’t archaeology, THEN we can see if we agree, can’t we?
27/06/2012 at 18:29
heritageaction
“can someone please tell me what isn’t archaeology from the events listing?”
Did you not read the article then?
Did you miss the bit where it says “Activity that doesn’t conform to archaeological ethics or aims isn’t Archaeology”?
27/06/2012 at 19:28
supernova
Reblogged this on Digging History.
27/06/2012 at 20:18
Claire
So you are saying the recording of finds does not conform to Archaeological aims or ethics then?
My eldest is already showing an interest in history,having been dragged around museums and historical re-enactments since he could walk and often return home from playing in the local woods with sherds of pottery, which in 99% of cases are either Victorian or Edwardian but he thinks may be that bit of elusive Roman pot. It’s great that he and others have got a chance to show items they find to the specialists (archaeologists) and either get a definitive opinion and a record or at worst, have a good chat to, further raising their awareness of history and furthering the aims and funds of conservation.
28/06/2012 at 03:41
heritageaction
“So you are saying the recording of finds does not conform to Archaeological aims or ethics then?”
No. Why on earth would you think that? It’s one of a number of things that denote Archaeology.
28/06/2012 at 08:44
Napoleon
I’m now lost as to what the article is supposed to be referring to. Is it Dowsing that’s the problem??
Can someone please enlighten me?
28/06/2012 at 11:09
Tim
!!
28/06/2012 at 15:27
Claire
Dowsing is not a proven scientific discipline, although it ‘does’ seem to work, it is just that we don’t understand how. I can see that having it alongside proper archaeology does create a problem in so much that it is then given credence, when in fact this is what it is lacking.
30/06/2012 at 20:15
bshistorian
In fact, it ‘seems to work’, but doesn’t. At all. In archaeology or any other field:
http://badarchaeology.wordpress.com/category/dowsing/
http://bshistorian.wordpress.com/tag/dowsing/