Thursday 18 July 2013

American Digger "Invites"


Among the "Responses to Pissed (sic) in Poland…" we find the following contribution ( July 17, 2013 at 3:17 pm) from American Digger Magazine. It is unsigned, but I am willing to bet that this is Butch Holcombe writing.
While we tend to agree that “Wally” is blinded by prejudice and old school thinking that hurts all interested in learning about the past via artifacts, we will try to keep an open mind. Perhaps he would like to come on the Relic Roundup show and defend his position? Consider this an invitation.
A few comments follow:

1) Hmm. A bit short on manners in Georgia. Generally when you address an invitation to somebody, you use their real name, and not refer to them as "[Warsaw] Wally". An invitation would also be written in the second rather than third person and would be signed. So, no I do not consider that an "invitation".

2) Note from the beginning the negative attitude embodied in my being called to the blackboard to "defend my position", implying the detectorist listeners (mostly the same people appearing on the Stout blog it seems) are going to have their "fun" at my expense trying to dislodge me from my "position" where I am placed as the passive victim of whatever they want to throw at me live on air (at three o'clock in the morning, to boot). Other contributors to previous episodes of the show have had more positive and interactive tasks, discussing how archaeologists and collectors can work together for common benefit, for example. Instead of being asked in a concrete manner for my thoughts on ways forward, I am being immediately placed in a position of defending a static and undefined "position". I really do not see any sense in such a discussion.

3) It may be comfortable for tekkies and artefact collectors in general to consider that the only reason what they are doing to the archaeological record is challenged is because of "prejudice". In my case, I'll point out that I set out the reasons why I consider the benign image that collectors like to project about what they do, an untenable vision. These are conclusions I have come to from observing artefact hunting in two countries at first hand from several points of view since the mid/late 1970s. Whatever Mr Holcombe (or whoever) would like to think, what I present here results from an assessment made after looking into a topic (for just under forty years in fact) rather than a pre-judged opinion. Among the sources for this assessment has been discussions directly with artefact hunters and collectors (for the past 13 years at least, though I was visiting metal detecting clubs in the UK in the late seventies and talking with detectorists in Poland in the '90s).

4) I really see nothing "old school" in desiring to preserve the archaeological resource from plunder merely for collectables for entertainment and profit, or failing that, enforcing (real) best practice leading to sustainable management of that resource. It seems quite a fundamental issue in modern archaeology.

5) As to conserving the archaeological record "hurt[ing] all interested in learning about the past via artifacts", I really do not accept that. There are many ways to learn about the past, not all of them through artefacts alone. As far as I am concerned, the main way we should be learning about the past is by using whole of the multifaceted information contained in the archaeological record (of which the contained artefacts are a single component). Even if, for the sake of the argument, we ignore that and say the way to the past is through artefacts alone, is the ONLY way to use them through personal collections? I would say not.  In fact is not the reference only to personal collection as a route to understanding the past in itself incredibly "Old School"? ("Petrarch" and all that.)

In any case, the archaeological heritage is not the private property of a single individual with a spade to destroy for his own personal pleasure or profit.  So what that Bazza Spademan learns something about the past by digging up a coin of Nero ? The rest of us know about Nero, there are books written about Nero and his times, why cannot Bazza Spademan learn about Nero and his times from reading a book, and not selectively and unreflexively hoiking out pieces of the archaeological record from first century AD archaeological sites?  Bazza may be having fun, but what does that leave for the rest of us and future generations?

5) Note the attitude of entitlement exhibited by this minority group of exploitive hobbyists. They consider it is I who have to deffend the conservationist position, rather than they who have to provide some better arguments justifying what they are doing.

6)  In any case, are they really expecting me to get up at three in the morning over here to talk to a bunch of metal detectorists phoning in daft questions from half way round the world?

I really feel no need to "defend" my position on this or anything else, on Holcombe's "Relic Roundup". Neither is it at all clear what I would be defending it from (Lisa McIntyre and her vision of Shangri-La?). I have access to forums, I have several blogs. Anyone who wants to learn my "position" can do so, anyone who does not can keep away. Anyone who wants to try to question my position generally does (usually though, it has to be said, by methods of the schoolyard than reasoned debate - there is no reason to think "Relic Roundup" would be any different). Artefact collectors and their archaeologist "partners" are welcome to use the comments section of my blog to add their own thoughts. Mr Holcombe however has failed to show up so far.

It is up to the reader to decide whether I am capable of defending my views on the topics I write about, or whether (as I attempt to show) there is a case for the collectors to answer. That's what this blog is about, presenting the other side of the story from the glib comforting claptrap spread about by no-questions-asking collectors and dealers, and their "partners" the archaeologists of the PAS-fold.  But also, I do not want anyone to take my word for it, I encourage anyone and everyone to register with a few detecting and collecting forums (Yahoo-ancient artefacts, Moneta-L for example) just to see for themselves what goes on there behind the façade.

9 comments:

Relic Roundup said...

Dear Mr. Barford,
First, our apologies in not addressing you by your proper name. Our staff assumed that "Wally" was your real name after seeing numerous references to it, and we admit the blunder. The invitation to appear on our show is sincere. Both relic hunters and archaeologists listen to the Relic Roundup show, and we would encourage you to share your views with a wider audience in a manner which permits one-on-one feedback, ie, a call-in show. Please send your reply directly to americandigger@att.net. We are making this invitation public and will also do so with your response. We anxiously await your reply.
Kindest Regards,
The Relic Roundup Team

kyri said...

yahoo ancientartifacts is not that bad ,with many ethical collectors as members,moneta- well i still read the few posts that are posted but it is mostly hard core us collectors and they dont take prisoners as i found out a few times when questioning their ethics,allthough there are many decent members of that list to who just see things differently than you and their own state department do on many topics.you should do the show,you could do it via webcam,would be intresting.
kyri.

Paul Barford said...

Beats me how, Mr "Relicroundupteam", you can believe my name is Wally (which you put in inverted commas) when following a link to a post where it says in big orange letters just to the left of the title was written by Paul Barford. But let's put that down to Dick ("detecting icon") Stout not being able to stick to facts.

I have already answered your "invitation":
http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2013/07/american-digger-invites.html
I will not be taking part in your programme.

I do not doubt for a moment your "sincerity", but I think we saw with the experience of Lisa McIntyre, the format of such a "show" is not really conducive to getting across a coherent picture of the complex issues surrounding artefact hunting and collecting.

Also the chances of your staff having any real ability to moderate any such discussion, to keep it on track, really seem pretty slim given they cannot even work out what my name is, suggesting complete unfamiliarity with the issues I discuss.

I also long ago, in my forum days, came to the conclusion that it's a waste of time talking TO artefact hunters. The majority cannot or will not even attempt to follow certain lines of argument.

Instead of talking TO metal detectorists, it seems to me more productive these days to address the issues ABOUT them.

In addition, it surely would be more useful to have this discussion with a local archaeologist, somebody from the AIA for example.

There is a pretty extensive (and growing) resource here detailing my "position" on a number of issues. I invite any of your listeners (and magazine's readers) interested in knowing it to surf through a selection of this blog's posts, and if they see something they would like to query and/or comment upon, I invite them to share their thoughts. I'd prefer them to have a bit more "meat" than UMRGOLF managed here -> http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2012/08/detecting-under-microscope-american.html?showComment=1345330676153#c5967066365365490407

(There are guidance notes for commentators in the left sidebar).

Thanks again for the invitation, and in turn I'd like to invite you to comment on those two posts you looked at a few hours ago, the American Digger one and the "where are these finds now (Archie Ray)" one. Please, be my guest.

Paul Barford said...

Well Kyrie, as you can see they are not so much interested in a presentation as getting me me fending off phone-call snipers ("defend your position") trying to catch me out rather than any proper discussion. There really seems no point, I neither know nor care about "metal detecting in parks in Tolpega Bay" or some inland waterway's wreck ordinance. These are local problems which get them all excited (see the "Task Force" stuff). I really think there is a genuine misunderstanding over there of what actually happens in the UK, what the PAS actually is and does and so on and so on, and how that relates (or does not) to what they do. Obviously it is the PAS and the situation over here in Europe which is the focus of this blog. What is equally obvious, given the depth of the misinformation/misunderstanding, an hour is not enough to even begin to explain some of these things properly when every couple of minutes or so you'd be interrupted, "we have another call, this time from Sam in New Jersey, go ahead Sam...". It's simply the wrong format to achieve anything useful. It is also the wrong audience, these people do not want to understand anything that will affect their "rights" and "freedoms" and they'd not be listening anyway.

As I have said, I have all my thoughts upfront here, for them to challenge if they want. I do not have any need to go over EXACTLY THE SAME STUFF in another format if they cannot even be bothered to get my name right, let alone read anything I have written. And if they need another format, there is a book coming out soon (in fact, now two). We can do a show on them after they've read them.

kshollywood said...

First off let me correct you, it is RELIC ROUNDUP. And for you to be complaining on how Mr.Butch called you Wally, you should give respect if you think you deserve respect. You just got through complaining about him not being proper with you, then you do the same thing in return, how professional. People like you have no business even talking to the public, you do have your opinions and you are intitled. But Mr.Butch is very respected in his field of expertise, as I'm sure you are. But your arrogance and stupidity is what you showed everyone in your comments. If you don't want to help bring the relic hunters and archeologist together then stay out of it and let us grow together and help each other. And by the way Mrs.Lisa would be a better guest than you anyway.

kshollywood said...

First off let me correct you, it is RELIC ROUNDUP. And for you to be complaining on how Mr.Butch called you Wally, you should give respect if you think you deserve respect. You just got through complaining about him not being proper with you, then you do the same thing in return, how professional. People like you have no business even talking to the public, you do have your opinions and you are intitled. But Mr.Butch is very respected in his field of expertise, as I'm sure you are. But your arrogance and stupidity is what you showed everyone in your comments. If you don't want to help bring the relic hunters and archeologist together then stay out of it and let us grow together and help each other. And by the way Mrs.Lisa would be a better guest than you anyway.

Paul Barford said...

kshollywood tried to leave a comment on this post, but it seems he did not read the sidebar on what gets comments rejected.

The correct name of the magazine is duly noted. Thank you.

Mr(?) Hollywood reckons that if I "don't want to help bring the relic hunters and archeologist together" (sic), I should "stay out of it and let us grow together and help each other. And by the way Mrs.Lisa would be a better guest than you anyway".
Ms Lisa already was a guest, and I am sure she was a better guest for such a programme.

Paul Barford said...

Case in point:
http://stoutstandards.wordpress.com/2013/07/18/a-more-formal-invitation/#comment-4204

"If it goes ahead, then I for one want to know about his academic credentials; his undefended thesis ; and why he thinks communist Poland is /was so great. "

So that's twelve minutes of my time gone on matters wholly unrelated to the issues I'd been invited to address. Actually a bit more as it might take a bit of time to explain to this rather slow tekkie that "Communist Poland" does not exist, and certainly never in the form that his earlier comments on it suggest he imagines it to be/have been.

Time wasters the lot of them.

Paul Barford said...

Internet connections between Poland and the USA seem a trifle unreliable. From another blog, it appears some metal detectorists tried to get a comment to this blog, but it never arrived. Maybe the US NSA has no got round to scanning it yet. Anyway, courtesy of Dick Stout, this is the message:

Incidentally Butch has since responded to his “comments” but apparently Wally did not care to share that (as least not as of this update). I will….

“Sadly, Mr. Bradford, given the tone of your remarks, we see no reason to comment after this on any post by you. We (hosts Butch Holcombe and Jeff Lubbert - not “Mr. Relicroundup” as you addressed your comment to) do very well with moderating our shows and have had guests representing both camps. We will offer nothing beyond having you on as a guest. That invitation is open, but we’ll go no farther in our efforts to let you share your concerns to an audience far beyond your personal blog. It is regretful that you will not use this opportunity to enlighten our listeners on your beliefs, but that is your decision. Meanwhile, we’ll push forward in our drive to get relic hunters and archaeologists working towards a more common goal than petty arguing”.

Regards,

Butch, Jeff, and the Relic Roundup team


Perhaps since they still seem to be having problems getting the name right, they typed the wrong address, which would explain why I did not get it.

The "formal" invitation, like the first insulting one, had no identifiable author; it says it was from a "team" and that is to whom I replied.

Well, let us wish Relic Roundup and American Digger a bucketload of success in their "drive to get relic hunters and archaeologists working towards a common goal". A good start would be distancing themselves from poisonous characters like Stout and Howland and their aggressively atavistic anti-archaeological stance disseminated by "Stout Standards" (sic) - http://stoutstandards.wordpress.com/. That would surly be a fundamental first step to demonstrate a commitment to the idea, rather than the usual tekkie ("we tried") lip-service facade.

I sincerely doubt however that Butch and his team will actually be doing that, in the same way as what they say above shows all too clearly they actually have no real or sincere interest in any kind of proper debate of any of the issues surrounding what they do, unless they come from docile yes-men "partners".

 
Creative Commons License
Ten utwór jest dostępny na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Unported.