20th November 2008, 10:46 PM
Go on, you know you want to....
Thread Rating:
|
What is an archaeologist?
|
21st November 2008, 12:46 AM
you are awful ... but this is an important point. One we should not shie away from. Wait til I wake up tommorrow.. it would be useful if we could really think about this one.. after all.. it is defined in law? or is it?
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.." Borekickers 
21st November 2008, 07:59 AM
There's no statutory definition in England unless you're in an AAI, and that's merely the definition of an 'investigating authority'. is the situation in Scotland or NI different? Is there relevant case law? Should there be a statutory definition? Should it be based on membership of a chartered institute?
How general do we go? Should we include 'amateurs', 'historic environment professionals' and detectorists as well as filthy diggers and not so (physically, if not metaphorically) grubby PMs and Unit Directors? 
21st November 2008, 08:28 AM
But to take a maxim from another context: If you need to ask, you probably aren't}
21st November 2008, 10:27 AM
According to a previous thread one obvious thing an archaeologist is is someone who can't claim a treasure trove reward!
This is a bit like the question 'what is art?', which might be defined as whatever someone says is art. In which case, anyone who says they are an archaeologist is one. This certainly does happen - there are several alleged archaeologists out there - but it's not a good definition.
21st November 2008, 01:25 PM
I have been pondering... and pondering... nothing seems to work (as yet)
a degree... well... many of us have no degree (myself included) but are good archaeologists.. so then I thought what defines a 'good' archaeologist.. and found that was just as fluffy... a track record of carrying out work that is classified as archaeological.. and been shown to be good at it... who decides? holdign a trowel? not every archaeologist has to hold one! surveyor, illustrator etc... though it could be argues they (we) are archaeological x, y or z's rather than "archaeologists" but that is semantics. I looked at the Dutch... https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/dspace/.../1887/9858 and on p11 they have the same idea (just quicker than us )Quote:quote:This obviously requires a definition of all personnel working in archaeology, and the Dutch Association of Archaeologists has been asked by the State Secretary for Culture to design a national register of archaeologists, which will allow professionals to be registered according to education, training and experience. This part of the work has not been completed yet, but the association has agreed on the basic principles.p11 the concept is that each person within defined roles, should have certain levels of quantifiable ability. so rather than define archaeologist, it is the role played that makes the archaeologist. ie... are you able to carry out a role as an archaeological surveyor to a required level of competance and within the guidelnes produced that defines you as an archaeological surveyor? Yes... in that case you are an archaeologist. Bingo! "I don't have an archaeological imagination.." Borekickers
21st November 2008, 02:19 PM
If you want a generic definition that covers all types of archaeologist, in all countries, both amateur and professional, then it is not really very hard to devise a definition:
"An archaeologist is any person who actively contributes to the practice of archaeology." You then have to define 'archaeology'. I have seen various definitions, but the one I have always liked best went something like this: "The study of the human past through the material remains of human activity". Of course, such a generic definition doesn't address questions of competence, qualifications, professionalism etc, but then those things would vary from time to time and place to place. If we wanted a definition of a competent professional archaeologist, we would need something much longer and more restrictive, and something that varied according to which branch of the profession we belong to. 1man1desk to let, fully furnished
21st November 2008, 02:28 PM
"An archaeologist is any person who actively contributes to the practice of archaeology"
this is part of the trouble.. and definition... So as my mother actively supported me, provided office space.. carried out various tasks such as collating data, etc.. did that make her an archaeologist? Does that make every metal detectorist who is involed in archaeological excavation 'an archaeologist' - but then not an archaeologist when they are not working on a site? Can you become one by just being on a site?.. and then magically stop being one when you leave the trench/survey area/lab? more to this than meets the brain! "I don't have an archaeological imagination.." Borekickers
21st November 2008, 03:05 PM
I agree with 1man's definition of archaeology, and suggest that an archaeologist who directs particpates or pursues archaeology. This would rule out mum's supporting budding archaeologists!
Professional status or competence is not relevant. You can be good or bad, amateur, professional or semi-pro in many walks of life. Bird watcher, model railway builder, footballer, artist, cook.... (I am not necessarily any of these!) |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)