Rant: the idea that you need a degree to dig a site is just gatekeeping

I spent last summer volunteering on a dig in New Mexico, just a regular guy with a shovel and some patience. The lead archaeologist kept saying only people with master's degrees could identify real artifacts. But I pulled out a broken pot sherd with a clear repair hole from the 1200s, and she admitted she missed it. We found 14 of those over three weeks, all because I was willing to get dirty and look close. My point is, formal training helps but it doesn't replace the sharp eye of someone who actually handles the dirt. Has anyone else on here had a pro overlook something obvious because they were too focused on theory?

2 comments

2 Comments

janac5110d ago

Hold up, maybe the real issue isn't degrees versus field work but that our whole system rewards looking for what you expect to find instead of what's actually there.

gavin_knight3910d ago

Got sick of that cycle myself a few years back. Started keeping a running list of things that surprised me in the field, stuff that contradicted what the textbooks or senior guys told me would happen. Then I'd go back and actually test those surprises instead of just writing them off as flukes. Turned out half the time my assumptions were wrong and the data was just telling me something I didn't want to hear. Broke me out of that confirmation bias trap pretty fast once I stopped trying to prove what I already thought and started chasing the weird stuff instead.