What is it that makes people think Archaeologist are bad?

[Twisted One]

Just curious, since it was something I was considering pursuing a career in that direction. It seems to me that a lot of what is being said about them make it sound like they are just elitist treasure hunters with the law backing them. So what is it that really makes the hobbyist dislike them? Or is it more of a depending on situation type thing?

I returned to school a couple years ago pursuing a Computer science degree to change my career field, but after two years of study I am finding the jobs disappearing here, and it is now a very limited field, so I am looking at changing direction yet again. And I notice that the Forestry service here as well as another agency is always looking for Archaeologist.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tom_in_CA]

because a lot of them (the purist ones anyhow) hate metal detecting. That's why.

 

[lastleg]

Because they are "elitist treasure hunters with the law backing them".

 

[Twisted One]

because a lot of them (the purist ones anyhow) hate metal detecting. That's why.

So as long as I keep my head and don't tell myself I am more than a treasure hunter I won't be condemned to the treasure hunting bowels of heck?

 

[Twisted One]

Because they are "elitist treasure hunters with the law backing them".

Not sure how that is a bad thing if you were and archie though....

 

[Graddick]

Oh boy, another one of these threads.

Twisted One, just keep an open mind about the whole thing and try to find a happy middle ground for yourself. The worst thing you can do is take an extremist position on either side and proclaim "All Archaeologists/All Metal Detectorists are thieves and liars and are our enemy!!!!"

 

[Tuberale]

Archaeologist = grave robber. Just legalizing it. I taught at several towns with a number of Native Americans. I don't know any who appreciated seeing their ancestors remains in a museum. IMO archaeologists are disrespectful of the human remains they uncover, and rarely speak of them outside of academia. Would you like your grandparents remains displayed in a museum?

I was happy to see the skull of Concommly, Chief of the Lower Chinooks, recently returned for a secret burial. Because the Chinooks flattened their leaders skulls while young, the skull became an instant sensation in Hawaii, where it was first moved to (and where the grave robber/archeaologist died from a disease contracted during the skull removal, I think), then in England where it was displayed for a short time then stored over 100 years until the bombardment of London in WWII.

It is rumored, but unconfirmed, that one of our recent presidents removed the skull of Geronimo (a federal offense) for use in his secret Skull and Crossbones rituals. Proof of such an offense would preclude that person from running for President of the United States, and I feel is a slap in the face to all Native Americans.

Fortunately, under NAGPRA many important cultural objects are now being returned to Native American tribes. IMO it's about time.

 

[foolsgoldtx]

If it were me, I would more pursue it as a hobby, not a field of work.
it takes a long time for an Arkie to make any kind of good money, you know they are always in need with the Forest Service, check out the pay scales.
This is something you can get into easily, and over the years work up to through local and state societies.
I dont think its a bad field to study at all, wish i would have actually, but having said that, I dont think I would want it to be my career.
thats why I am here!

as far as why they are 'bad' most of the above posts addressed it.

I am personally just fine with them, just wish we could hang on to more of our finds! I have yet to experience any of the hard-headedness of an Arkie first hand, but have heard a lot of horror stories....of course you always hear the bad, not so much the good

I do actually agree with Tuberale, there is a lot of junk going on in the field that shouldnt be, out of respect for the cultures being studied.

 

[Twisted One]

I know very little about it at this point. What I do know about the Native American side of it, at least in my area. .. The couple of burial grounds discovered were actually revealed by, and dug by Native Americans from the local reservation. The only government entity was the couple of archaeologist that only taught the local Native Americans how to dig in order to preserve as much as possible and not destroy stuff.

If I were to become an Archie I would like to think I would be on the borderline of hobbyist, if I found something I felt pertinent to history I think I would turn it over to be preserved for history sake. I know two local archies, one has been doing it professionally for years, the other is new to it and has only been an aide on a few digs. Both have private collections. Neither one has in their private collection anything from a grave site, and only one has a few Native American relics, not counting arrowheads and such. The one that has Native American relics actually offered them to the local Reservations Native American museum only to be refused because they have tons of them already in storage and on display.

So I have the feeling a lot of the bad feelings towards archies are unfounded, and only based on opinion and rumors. i am sure there are extremist ones, and bad ones, just like in any profession, and any hobby. I am sure there are people out there that hate metal detectorist, and I am sure there are people out there that hate classic car hobbyist, and coin collectors, and fishermen, hunters, politicians, law enforcement, gun dealers, etc... There is no way to please everyone, I just hope that if I do pursue this that I will not be judged by rumors, and the acts of others, yeah, well, I can hope can't I?

 

[ouachitacaveman]

What happens all too often is that people who are uneducated about archaeology want to criticize and label all archaeologists as grave robbers, and this is not correct. In many states, regular folks
like you and I can volunteer in archaeological excavations, and learn through training and hands-on that this (grave-robbing ) is NOT what archaeologists are hired to do.

In the early 1900's, this ( grave-robbing ) did indeed happen quite often, because at the time
there were no laws to protect these sacred sites.
The (new laws) have been enacted to protect grave-sites, which archaeologists help to oversee on behalf of native Americans. Grave-sites are not excavated unless they
have already been disturbed, or are in the area of new construction, as I mentioned in another recent post.

Pot hunters do MUCH more grave-robbing than any archaeologist. These are the people we should educate - or prosecute. As stated in posts above, there are, or course, bad apples in every profession, and these folks care only for profit and have no honor or regard for the sanctity of grave-sites.
Archaeologists work for an institution, university, or govt. agency in most cases,
and are required to abide by the new laws and a code of ethics that encourage preservation and dignity. It is likely any human remains still on display at museums will soon be returned to the proper tribes. I hope so, as these remains may belong to my own ancestors.
I have been a volunteer amateur archaeologist for a year now, and all the
archaeologists I have met are honorable men and women who strive to protect grave-sites, and
they (and most of us ) discourage desecration of graves. If a highway is built through a native-American
graveyard, it is the archaeologists who must do the dirty work of carefully salvaging the remains.
These remains are then transferred to the respective tribes that once lived in this area. Why
are archaeologists not given credit for giving back the remains to the tribe the deceased belonged to,
and trying to preserve the dignity of the effort ? The tribes appreciate these efforts made by the "archies".
Preservation of not only grave-sites, but artifacts and historic sites are all priorities of archaeology.
Volunteer and find out. I volunteered for 3 days just last week with the US Forest Service to try to locate possible sites ( to protect ) before the next timber sale. I also used a metal-detector while there, in case we found anything historical made of metal , but I only found bulldozer parts lost when they were dozing the fire-trails.
Protection and preservation is very rewarding. Archaeology does not discourage treasure hunting, as long as it does not desecrate a sacred or historical site.

 

[thumper]

Archaeology does not discourage treasure hunting, as long as it does not desecrate a sacred or historical site. WHAT IS A HISTORICAL SITE? where a coin that is 50 yrs. old is buried, or a wheel from a 1920 car was lost? or a piece of silver has washed up on a beach after a hurricane. or where my grandfather who died in 1965 buried his mad money in a mason jarthis is why most arkies are looked down upon...everything that is buried is not a treasure that belongs to the gobberment....most metal detectorist would report something historic....

 

[Twisted One]

I have been watching the Passport in time website with interest in volunteering for one of these outing, hopefully one will come up in my area soon.

 

[bluehunter1973]

Im not an archie I do metal detect some are bad on both sides so If I had to have a label I would be a Huntologist. I preserve what needs preserving in my private collection and sell the unneeded stuff.

 

[[email protected]]

I hope you go through with the training and become an archaeologist. Our metal detecting community needs more people to bridge the gap instead of bunch of complainers.

First of all, people who do not do a lot of internal reflection tend to use generalizations. This often leads to separation. Fear of the unknown.

What have any complainers done towards achieving a better relationship with archaeologists? Do you think hate mongering is going to help?

Myself and others have been spending tons of extra time incorporating archaeological methods to our relic hunting so that we are at least saving the important information that the artifacts provide in their context.

If we can achieve these practices then we will no longer be a threat to archies. People who do nothing but call them names are NOT helping the relationship we are trying to establish. They are in fact making it worse.

I understand the anger. Been there done that. I could fill page after page of rants about archies. What's it going to accomplish?

I could also fill many pages with reasons why archaeologists are beneficial and their methods do provide a wealth of knowledge. Unlike the average detectorist who is strip mining every piece of metal out of the ground and maybe 1% of them in North America actually record the finds in situ.

If y'all are dreaming about treasure trove laws like the U.K. has, then how do you think these laws will be created? You think the laws will just fall out of the sky and onto our laps?

Do you think all the reality T.V. detecting shows are going to help? Take a look around!

Also, PLEASE stop calling them arkies. One guy got mixed up and now everyone is using that word. The correct slang is ARCHIES.

Thanks.

Now, can we work towards evolution?

P.S. This post is not directed to anyone in particular. In my mind, I have a collection of posts going back many years on this forum.

 

[Smudge]

They want complete control over all things historical.

They'd rather an artifact rust in the ground, dissolving forever, than to let you or find it and keep it.

 

[ouachitacaveman]

Archies are GIVEN authority over ( protected ) sites, usually
by the State or Fed. Govt. to monitor and preserve them, not to seek treasure for themselves. Land-owners also give them permission more than we would expect, to help protect sites on their own property. The archaeologists must get permission from the land-owner when seeking to investigate an area that is private land. This is a fact.
If the private land has been found to contain historic, or prehistoric
grave sites, then the sites are protected by the new laws to keep people out of the graves.
As for hunting in the ocean and on beaches , I do not know the laws there. I personally think any of
us should be able to recover ship-wreck treasures, if we go to all the effort needed to do so.
Though many of the Archies do work in historic preservation, I think most of them are more
concerned at preserving and protecting pre-historic sites, especially grave-sites of native-Americans.
I search for historic metal artifacts all the time, never had a problem with an Archie trying to control me.
If a site is a known, protected historic site and cataloged as such, I have no problem TH'ing elsewhere.

 

[BerntOut]

Just curious, since it was something I was considering pursuing a career in that direction. It seems to me that a lot of what is being said about them make it sound like they are just elitist treasure hunters with the law backing them. So what is it that really makes the hobbyist dislike them? Or is it more of a depending on situation type thing?

I returned to school a couple years ago pursuing a Computer science degree to change my career field, but after two years of study I am finding the jobs disappearing here, and it is now a very limited field, so I am looking at changing direction yet again. And I notice that the Forestry service here as well as another agency is always looking for Archaeologist.

Yea, IF you want to work for peanuts! Archeologists are generally the lowest paid personnel. You gotta love the work,not the money.

 

[BerntOut]

Im not an archie I do metal detect some are bad on both sides so If I had to have a label I would be a Huntologist. I preserve what needs preserving in my private collection and sell the unneeded stuff.

Oh boy, another one of those "(fill in the blank) "ologists! LOL!

 

[Twisted One]

Just curious, since it was something I was considering pursuing a career in that direction. It seems to me that a lot of what is being said about them make it sound like they are just elitist treasure hunters with the law backing them. So what is it that really makes the hobbyist dislike them? Or is it more of a depending on situation type thing?

I returned to school a couple years ago pursuing a Computer science degree to change my career field, but after two years of study I am finding the jobs disappearing here, and it is now a very limited field, so I am looking at changing direction yet again. And I notice that the Forestry service here as well as another agency is always looking for Archaeologist.

Yea, IF you want to work for peanuts! Archeologists are generally the lowest paid personnel. You gotta love the work,not the money.

In my area it starts at around $27k and the next level jumped to like $32k a year. Which isn't great, but my area's average income is like minimum wage. So it's okay money for entry level. But the government benefits are where it pays I think.

 

[thumper]

dang.....i called an archie an arkie.....ohh the dang spell check...lol