19th March 2011, 04:07 PM
My first shot at why value archaeology and what archaeologists do covers some of the same issue wesh andy has but he got in while Iwas thinking about posting.
We need to be careful about demonstrating the value of heritage only in instrumental terms otherwise we will have the problem of being compared over these values. For example archaeology can foster community involvement but so does funding X community group ? which one is better?
We need to demonstrate value that is unique to the discipline and resource - I don?t think this is impossible to do we just haven?t been very good at it so far. Archaeologists are attempting to answer some of the big questions (although it doesn?t feel like that often) with a unique and non renewable dataset. Questions like Why are we here? and How did we get here? I think we underestimate people?s appetite and curiosity to understand their place in the world (or as Brian Cox is currently demonstrating the universe). These questions are important, they are part of what makes us human ? if people don?t realise this then we need to be bolder (and better) at telling them.
These questions aren?t in the forefront of people?s minds now, I, like everyone else am more concerned about the immediate wellbeing of family friends in the recession ? But these questions wont go away, I can envisage human societies in the future also being curious about these questions and these questions will be important to them, in fact I can?t envisage a human society which isn?t. We have all seen thousands of years of mostly religious artefacts reflecting this part of human nature.
This means taking a break has significnat ramifications, we can?t say that we will stop taking care now and when the recession is over we can pick it up again. Without archaeologists working with planners, sites and landscapes will be destroyed unexamined and unrecorded. We deny not just ourselves the opportunity to answer these questions but also everyone in the future.
We need to be careful about demonstrating the value of heritage only in instrumental terms otherwise we will have the problem of being compared over these values. For example archaeology can foster community involvement but so does funding X community group ? which one is better?
We need to demonstrate value that is unique to the discipline and resource - I don?t think this is impossible to do we just haven?t been very good at it so far. Archaeologists are attempting to answer some of the big questions (although it doesn?t feel like that often) with a unique and non renewable dataset. Questions like Why are we here? and How did we get here? I think we underestimate people?s appetite and curiosity to understand their place in the world (or as Brian Cox is currently demonstrating the universe). These questions are important, they are part of what makes us human ? if people don?t realise this then we need to be bolder (and better) at telling them.
These questions aren?t in the forefront of people?s minds now, I, like everyone else am more concerned about the immediate wellbeing of family friends in the recession ? But these questions wont go away, I can envisage human societies in the future also being curious about these questions and these questions will be important to them, in fact I can?t envisage a human society which isn?t. We have all seen thousands of years of mostly religious artefacts reflecting this part of human nature.
This means taking a break has significnat ramifications, we can?t say that we will stop taking care now and when the recession is over we can pick it up again. Without archaeologists working with planners, sites and landscapes will be destroyed unexamined and unrecorded. We deny not just ourselves the opportunity to answer these questions but also everyone in the future.