Dear Ben,

I find myself in agreement with much of what you say, but I also think that
anybody should also feel free to criticise whoever they want who contributes to
this list. There is clearly a difference between criticsm and abuse or insult,
which we will certainly not tolerate. And in any case people have a right and
an opportunity to reply.

My more general point is that although I certainly welcome the fact that
archaeologists will want to put their expertise at the service of heritage
protection, I do not think that our responsibility should stop at that level
and, as you also say, the ultimate causes of heritage destruction will have to
be analysed. I like to think that I am first and foremost a responsible (and
very concerned) citizen of this world and as such I will react to any forms of
tyranny and injustice, inside and outside my profession. Or should I rather be
(actively) concerned about heritage from 9 to 5, and about the world in the
evenings and weekends?

Cheers,
Umberto 




-- 
Umberto Albarella
Department of Archaeology
University of Sheffield
Northgate House
West Street
Sheffield S1 4ET
United Kingdom
Telephone: (+) 44 (0) 114 22 22 943 
Fax: (+) 44 (0) 114 27 22 563 
http://www.shef.ac.uk/archaeology/staff/albarella.html
For Archaeologists for Global Justice (AGJ) see:
http://www.shef.ac.uk/archaeology/global-justice.html

"only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned 
and the last fish been caught we will realise we cannot eat money"


Quoting "Edwards, Ben [benedw]" <[log in to unmask]>:

> This is a lengthy post, for which I make no apology.
> 
> I cannot help but agree with Maresi and Umberto, in that we should - as
> intelligent people with a concern for the rights and wellbeing of others -
> object to tyranny and oppression wherever possible. They are, after all, the
> circumstances under which heritage is most usually politically appropriated
> or damaged and abused.
> 
> Geoff is also correct, in that a threat to global archaeological heritage is
> the thing which, in this context, we are most qualified to comment upon; and
> indeed it is the only field we are held in enough respect to be heeded by
> those in power - this is only pragmatic. This does not, however, need to
> stand in opposition to the stance of Maresi and Umberto, above.
> 
> However, I refuse to accept Maresi's implied assertion, made in her initial
> post, that because we are Westerners, there is something hypocritical about
> decrying damage to heritage. By those standards is it equally hypocritical to
> decry genocide and forced migrations in the present? because 'the West' has
> been guilty of that in the past too. Yes, former imperial powers are guilty
> of creating many of the problems facing the world, yes the UK and US
> governments have propped up the Mubarak regime, and yes the West used to
> bring about the majority of the world's cultural vandalism; but that does not
> mean that it is wrong to call for help (wherever it may be found) when we see
> irreplaceable and utterly unique examples of our shared human past faced with
> destruction. Regardless of the actions of predecessors from the same
> hemisphere as myself, I choose to be ethical, I choose to object, and I
> should not wish to be summarily judged due to the actions of archaeologists
> of fifty years ago. Besides, I do not believe a single mail to this list has
> placed the welfare of heritage above the value of human life, despite what
> has been claimed in earlier posts - they simply react to a potential crisis
> in heritage vandalism.
> 
> Finally, I hope we all agree that we have the right to voice our opinions on
> anything in a free and unfettered manner. It is therefore clearly wrong for
> Sarah and Allison (who were responsible for the initial post) to be
> criticised for the manner and extent to which they choose to react to world
> events. It is entirely reasonable for Sarah/Allison, as concerned
> archaeologists, to make a plea for any organisation, with any influence, to
> try and protect Egyptian antiquities. It is not reasonable for them to be
> criticised on the grounds they are not being as 'political' as Maresi would
> wish, still less because they happen to belong to a Western tradition of
> scholarship.
> 
> At the final reckoning I would have to agree with Geoff. Archaeologists (of
> whatever nationality) are the only voice that will speak for the *long-term*
> interests of cultural heritage - it is no crime for them to do so.
> 
> Ben
> 
> -------------------
> Dr Ben Edwards
> Lecturer in Archaeological Practice
> University of Liverpool
>