30th January 2012, 05:07 PM
My dissertation was about how archaeologists appear in the visual media. It is interesting to wonder why archaeologists feel so threatened by so-called pseudo archaeologists and it is also a great irony that most pseudo archaeologists- the ones in the media anyway, make a good deal more money than the mainstream ones. I have two degrees in archaeology but I would not consider myself any more of an archaeologist than any other person on the street simply by attending university. If any person wishes to bring anything to an ongoing archaeological argument then they should be free to do so, unfettered by the crusty tut-tuts of university bound profs unwilling to move with the times.
I used to have a great deal more respect for so-called mainstream archaeologists until I met them and found that, when they are not disemboweling each other in journals, they are to be found ripping the opinions of "lesser mortals" to bits simply because their objects of ridicule did not reference them in any publication. Take for example the work of Roger Stalley. He layed into American Professor Philip Callahan for daring to stray outside his field and suggest that the base of Irish Round Towers were used to heal people. Even though some of the ideas may have been a little out there, surely everyone is entitled to an opinion. In four years of university courses I have seen nothing to suggest that an archaeologist's assessment is any more reliable than that of any other person.
I used to have a great deal more respect for so-called mainstream archaeologists until I met them and found that, when they are not disemboweling each other in journals, they are to be found ripping the opinions of "lesser mortals" to bits simply because their objects of ridicule did not reference them in any publication. Take for example the work of Roger Stalley. He layed into American Professor Philip Callahan for daring to stray outside his field and suggest that the base of Irish Round Towers were used to heal people. Even though some of the ideas may have been a little out there, surely everyone is entitled to an opinion. In four years of university courses I have seen nothing to suggest that an archaeologist's assessment is any more reliable than that of any other person.