Some of these things are very interesting, and I hope someone starts excavating right away! I like those Childress Creek circles...are they stone?
If they are indeed manmade, they don't look much like anything else I've seen...so there's some technical innovation for you.
But I think some of those things are just weird rocks.
In the sandhills of North and South Carolina we find something called
"Indian paint Pots" which are hollow iron 0xide nodules. Inside there is
variously colored iron oxide powder or rough pigment, which the Indians did use for coloring things.
I have seen rocks where iron has oxidised and left veins or intrusions and often look angular...but I admit some of the pictures in the "anarchaeology" url are amazing.
i have a question about all the questions this software [google earth] will raise.
is there a shortage of archaeologists?
what if a hundred thousand new areas of interest suddenly pop up when the entire globe is available at high res? should anyone capable of passing 1 written test for a permit be able to dig these places? or should there be a tiered system where certain sites are open to anyone with the means [the costs to do it drop everyday] and ability to pass a test on the essentials?
eratoh wrote:i have a question about all the questions this software [google earth] will raise.
is there a shortage of archaeologists?
what if a hundred thousand new areas of interest suddenly pop up when the entire globe is available at high res? should anyone capable of passing 1 written test for a permit be able to dig these places? or should there be a tiered system where certain sites are open to anyone with the means [the costs to do it drop everyday] and ability to pass a test on the essentials?
There is a shortage of archaeologists. There are already many known sites waiting to be excavated. Even more importantly than the shortage of archaeologists is the shortage of funding for excavation. Many sites are "saved" for future excavation when technologies advance and allow less intrusive, less destructive methods.
eratoh wrote:i have a question about all the questions this software [google earth] will raise.
is there a shortage of archaeologists?
what if a hundred thousand new areas of interest suddenly pop up when the entire globe is available at high res? should anyone capable of passing 1 written test for a permit be able to dig these places? or should there be a tiered system where certain sites are open to anyone with the means [the costs to do it drop everyday] and ability to pass a test on the essentials?
There is a shortage of archaeologists. There are already many known sites waiting to be excavated. Even more importantly than the shortage of archaeologists is the shortage of funding for excavation. Many sites are "saved" for future excavation when technologies advance and allow less intrusive, less destructive methods.
Is a chronic eternal shortage of archaeologists and a potentionally endless supply of sites? suddenly something that could change the way archaeology should be approached? does the realization there are a thousand sites in an area where it was hoped there were ten [with the possiblity of digging 2] diminish the value of each to a point where archaelogy could be reduced to something like a non resident hunter [with appropriate restrictions/requirements]
eratoh wrote:i have a question about all the questions this software [google earth] will raise.
is there a shortage of archaeologists?
what if a hundred thousand new areas of interest suddenly pop up when the entire globe is available at high res? should anyone capable of passing 1 written test for a permit be able to dig these places? or should there be a tiered system where certain sites are open to anyone with the means [the costs to do it drop everyday] and ability to pass a test on the essentials?
There is a shortage of archaeologists. There are already many known sites waiting to be excavated. Even more importantly than the shortage of archaeologists is the shortage of funding for excavation. Many sites are "saved" for future excavation when technologies advance and allow less intrusive, less destructive methods.
Is a chronic eternal shortage of archaeologists and a potentionally endless supply of sites? suddenly something that could change the way archaeology should be approached? does the realization there are a thousand sites in an area where it was hoped there were ten [with the possiblity of digging 2] diminish the value of each to a point where archaelogy could be reduced to something like a non resident hunter [with appropriate restrictions/requirements]
I don't know what you're asking. I'm not a proffesional archaeologist, but I am authorized by the Texas Historical Commision to find and record sites. None of the sites I have found and recorded have ever been excavated more than just a small test unit. More and more states are turning to amateurs to help in finding and protecting sites. The pay for field archaeologists isn't good at all so people like me who are willing to do it for free on weekends are not willing to try to do it for a living. I make more money at my real job. Volunteers like me provide a free labor force for THC sponsored field schools and rescue operations. I have worked surveying for a new lake around Nacgdoches. We found the sites before they were to be flooded. Even then we only looked for sites which would be on the edge of the lake and suffer from erosion. Sites are almost never fully excavated. I don't know if any of this answered you question or not.
Frank Harrist wrote:
There is a shortage of archaeologists. There are already many known sites waiting to be excavated. Even more importantly than the shortage of archaeologists is the shortage of funding for excavation. Many sites are "saved" for future excavation when technologies advance and allow less intrusive, less destructive methods.
Is a chronic eternal shortage of archaeologists and a potentionally endless supply of sites? suddenly something that could change the way archaeology should be approached? does the realization there are a thousand sites in an area where it was hoped there were ten [with the possiblity of digging 2] diminish the value of each to a point where archaelogy could be reduced to something like a non resident hunter [with appropriate restrictions/requirements]
I don't know what you're asking. I'm not a proffesional archaeologist, but I am authorized by the Texas Historical Commision to find and record sites. None of the sites I have found and recorded have ever been excavated more than just a small test unit. More and more states are turning to amateurs to help in finding and protecting sites. The pay for field archaeologists isn't good at all so people like me who are willing to do it for free on weekends are not willing to try to do it for a living. I make more money at my real job. Volunteers like me provide a free labor force for THC sponsored field schools and rescue operations. I have worked surveying for a new lake around Nacgdoches. We found the sites before they were to be flooded. Even then we only looked for sites which would be on the edge of the lake and suffer from erosion. Sites are almost never fully excavated. I don't know if any of this answered you question or not.
what does the state require of you to be able to dig and what would they require of a non us resident like me if i saw something in google and wanted to spend 6 months digging... my own site myself my money.
eratoh wrote:
Is a chronic eternal shortage of archaeologists and a potentionally endless supply of sites? suddenly something that could change the way archaeology should be approached? does the realization there are a thousand sites in an area where it was hoped there were ten [with the possiblity of digging 2] diminish the value of each to a point where archaelogy could be reduced to something like a non resident hunter [with appropriate restrictions/requirements]
I don't know what you're asking. I'm not a proffesional archaeologist, but I am authorized by the Texas Historical Commision to find and record sites. None of the sites I have found and recorded have ever been excavated more than just a small test unit. More and more states are turning to amateurs to help in finding and protecting sites. The pay for field archaeologists isn't good at all so people like me who are willing to do it for free on weekends are not willing to try to do it for a living. I make more money at my real job. Volunteers like me provide a free labor force for THC sponsored field schools and rescue operations. I have worked surveying for a new lake around Nacgdoches. We found the sites before they were to be flooded. Even then we only looked for sites which would be on the edge of the lake and suffer from erosion. Sites are almost never fully excavated. I don't know if any of this answered you question or not.
what does the state require of you to be able to dig and what would they require of a non us resident like me if i saw something in google and wanted to spend 6 months digging... my own site myself my money.
In Texas on private property anyone can dig up anything. My qualifications were that I had lots of field experience and was knowledgeable about the NAs of my area. I was then nominated by another Steward or a professional archaeologist and voted on by the board and then they asked me if I'd do it. Ethics would require that you have a professional archaeologist on site if you want to do the dig right. I have pro friends who will help me for free when they have time. There is no digging allowed on public land without permits.
and that is a sensible approach to archaeology. if i'm willing to dig and the site will never ever get dug otherwise, i should be able. credentialed or not.
In Texas on private property anyone can dig up anything.
with the property owner's permission...right?
eratoh might have second thoughts as he enters Texas with a truckful of shovels and a bulldozer, and sees those big signs that say,
"Don't mess with Texas!"
I would love to start digging myself, but I realize that without some
certification and training, and oversight of the project, that it might be
destructive to proceed. But, on the other hand, maybe we are sometimes too cautious.
As eratoh was suggeting, we can never dig everything up! In fact, you might say that new archaeological sites are being created by us every day!
(middens, for example)
In Texas on private property anyone can dig up anything.
with the property owner's permission...right?
eratoh might have second thoughts as he enters Texas with a truckful of shovels and a bulldozer, and sees those big signs that say,
"Don't mess with Texas!"
I would love to start digging myself, but I realize that without some
certification and training, and oversight of the project, that it might be
destructive to proceed. But, on the other hand, maybe we are sometimes too cautious.
As eratoh was suggeting, we can never dig everything up! In fact, you might say that new archaeological sites are being created by us every day!
(middens, for example)
you have to have rules, regulations and requirements. there shouldn't be any messing, its not pillaging... its fulfilling the desires of our ancestors. i hope someday someone digs up my patio and sees the handprints. thats expressly why we put them there, its that a new idea? i know my house will never warrant a seven year study so noone will ever see them?
i don't exactly know whats up. anyone going to any arch. conferences in the usa this month? if you do and see a little group of paraniod men speaking a strange language, i suspect you're about to find out.
i posted the pictures because they fibbed to me first.
if the pics aren't all mac friendly let me know
