2nd September 2009, 05:40 PM
to continue that quote... it does say that it can be done WITH archaeologists who have experience, qualifications (if you like) and professional ethics? I am able to be both and to accept both... I have no formal qualifications in archaeology, but do seem to be a reasonable archaeologist... I write my reports and present to the public, I am happy in my archaeology. I also work with people now that carry on archaeology as a hobby (I did not say detecting mind ) and are merchant bankers (well, today they were investment brokers) they dug the hole where I want the hole, they took the levels with the right heights.. they took samples and bagged finds... I and others provide the expertise to make sure it works to a level of competence and finish off with a good report...
Remember this is a debate, and a debate about archaeology and the future of the profession... you seem to think the opposite to the holy archaeologist is the evil MD. and that is a sweeping statement as well.
[Edit - for clarification] For example, I would decide on where the trench went (pro) they can dig the trench (am) I would set up the total station and locate it in 3D (Pro) they can take the readings etc (am) I have the knowledge to guide, they have the enthusiasm to keep me going!
Lets keep this on track... argue against me, by all means. :face-confused:
Now I am off to an adult learning to teach people how to dig! :0
For really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he
Thomas Rainborough 1647
Thomas Rainborough 1647