Wrapping Up at Fort James

Time Team,

I'm a fan on the UK version, and have to say that I enjoyed the Time Team America episodes. I was just thinking to myself tonight how the people and different feel of the show (as compared to the UK series) was really starting to grow on me. Then I get on here and find out its the last episode!

Hopefully you can find funding for next year. The nature of the digs seems a bit different in the states than the UK, but that also makes a nice contrast.

There, they get to dig for walls and tile floors and big beefy artifacts. Here its clovis points and burn marks. :)

Thanks for the series. Wish there was more.

This has been the most enthralling I have seen on television for a long time. Thanks! I hope you are able to continue it next year.

When will we get more information about the Fort James dig?

Candace,
if you go to the "site report" section of the website, you can get a site update and download the report written about the excavation. You can also see more pictures, videos, maps, etc about the Fort James dig! Fun stuff!

I was very dissapointed in this presentation by the missinformation. The research was poor, the dig technique is questionable. I live in the region, and have studied the history. I also studied Archaeology and Geology at university. They missed the mark by a mile. The only thing I liked is that they confused the location to protect it.

Respectfuly
Michael Slayton

I have really enjoyed the first season of the show and hope there will be a second season. One small suggestion: check out the difference between "calvary" and "cavalry." People often confuse the two in everyday conversation, but I was surprised to hear them confused on public television.

I am appalled that the host of this program apparently doesn't know that the word is 'CAVALRY', not 'CALVARY'. On T.V., supposedly a "teaching" opportunity!!

I was surprised to hear the word Sioux to describe the native people of the region.

I too have to say that I agree with Michael and missing by a mile as according to the maps of the area at time - http://www.sdhistory.org/arc/military/Forts/fort_james.htm#Publications - which shows that Ft James was located on the James River just north of town called Olivet [SD] and the reference to the Rockport Hutterite colony SD which is located by Mitchell SD and Alexandria SD is quite a distance away. Could your excavation unearthed another fort in the area as there seems to be several?

Also your “stables” - could it have been a barn of sorts for the cattle that was mentioned and have been one of the “settlers” buildings?

I have been researching that area as in the 1880’s my relatives farmstead there. Have tried to download the "update PDF file" but must be very large as my dial up server is not handling but will try it again.

I do find your program interesting but it would be nice to have things wrapped up and not leave a person wondering if the dig ever did get finished.
Hope to see more on this

Nice, but I wonder why other programs in this series are not available overseas, but yet this is?

I have enjoyed all of the shows in this series and hope there are more next year.
But I especially enjoyed this one about Ft James as I am pretty sure an ancestor was one of those Iowa soldiers. I know very little about him other then his name and that he fought Indians in the Civil War. (and from watching this it sounds like there was very little fighting going on.) I also have a picture of him in his older yrs. So that made his particular show abit more personal to me.
Thanks.

The incessant utterance by the host of "geophys" rather than "geophysics" was distracting, unprofessional, and "miseducational".

I had to watch the Ft. James episode on-line because of a local PBS fund drive. The show was great. Thank you for making the episodes available on-line. I am anticipating future episodes.

ah yes, this is a carry over from the UK Time Team...

Do looters have access to the same techniques and equipment that bonified archeologist do? What is the concenses of the "team" regarding what might be done to protect the cultural integrity of a historic site?

Last episode?! I hope not! What will it take to insure that you come back for a second season?

Dewey --

Yes, "looters" do have access to the same techniques and equipment as bonafide archaeologists do, but "looters" (in the real sense of the term) care only about the artifacts. Archaeologists, on the other hand, are more interested in the contextual information the artifacts can give about the activities at a site. Protecting the cultural integrity of a historic site is difficult because of the many different ways sites can be impacted. Some state laws allow the land owner to do anything to a site (including excavating it or destroying it)while other states require the land owner to get a permit to dig sites on their property. As archaeologists, we try not to dig archaeological sites unless there is no other alternative -- excavation is usually a final resort since it is a destructive process.

Joe

where is the Fort located?

It is a shame this is the last of the season. I have enjoyed them as much as I enjoyed the UK series. I too hope the funding comes in. When there are future shows I make a request. Is it possible to move the commentary titles (names etc) more into the middle of the screen. I don't have a wide screen TV and the titles are lost on the sides.

Love the show!

qI heard the term looters used over and over on your fort janes dig. I am attempting to understand what your team is trying to accomplish by using the term so loosly and over and over again. If on private property with permission from the land owner, how can this be looting??? I have been involved with attempting to protect american antiquities for years and have found the greatest opposition to this comes from the archaeoligists and government themselves. It apperas your group is furthering the agenda that either we find and write about or no one does. This term "looters" appers to mean anyone not on your team or associated with the government. I would be interested in your views on this as there are private groups (like mine) not being allowed access to sights that are being destroyed by govenment programs. What I am hearing is we would rather see the artifacts lost forever that to be in the hands of anyone not affilated with government program

When it comes to pioneer era sites in the Midwest and West, I share Brent's concerns about the use of the word "looters" to describe anyone not seen as a member of their team. Legally digging such sites on private property, with permission, is not looting. It is often part of an enjoyable and educational family hobby enjoyed by thousands of Americans. Sadly, the position being taken by most archaeologists in recent years is that they are the only ones capable of uncovering and interpreting the past. While Native American sites (often graves) are best left undug or carefully excavated by professionals, European settlement sites in the Midwest and West are not in the same category. The net result of the work of archaeologists on pioneer sites is usually a dense scholarly paper read by a few academics and the disappearance of whatever artifacts they may find into the basement store room of some museum, never to be seen again. None of this does anything to educate the public or advance the cause of historical preservation in America. I know many serious diggers who have done far more to disperse knowledge than the vast majority of professional archaeologists. The diggers often display their finds at local museums and libraries, give presentations to students and at nursing homes, and share what they have found with their communities, not to mention boring their friends and relatives with their artifact displays and endless talk about history. Too often the academic gets lost in minutiae and devotes too much time to data which, in the real world, is of little use. We don't need someone to count the chicken bones in a pioneer era privy to conclude that the pioneers ate chicken. We already know that simply by reading books available in any local library and from contemporaneous accounts in old newspapers, to name only two examples. I think the accusatory characterization of other diggers in the Fort James episode as looters only served to make the Time Team look like a bunch of jealous children, upset that someone else had the initiative and energy to dig the site first. Their self-important sense of entitlement became very evident. The Time Team would do well to enlist a few digger/collectors to help them. Many of the diggers I know are far more knowledgeable about what they are doing than the Time Team people stumbling around at Fort James, despite all their high-tech toys. (And come on... "calvary" to describe horse soldiers?)

I enjoy this show very much, but like some of the others, I found the term "looters" very offensive. I have never looted an item with my metal detector, although I have recovered many
Civil War relics with it. Every time I swing my metal detector over a possable camp site or fort, I have the land owners permission to be on the site. Using the word "looting" in the way this show did was in bad form.

Why were the walls buried in so much dirt, I can't believe that much soil blew in within 150 years.

On an unrelated note...isn't it obvious people that if you metal detect a site and take artifacts, there is no record of it. You found it and took it. Sure you did it with permission, but nothing is recorded. The "evil" archeologist and govt people actually record it and dont just treasure hunt. Its a simple concept.

It is possible for that much soil to blow in over the last 150 years. During the 1930's the midwest region was inundated with huge duststorms that wreaked havoc upon the Dakota's. This overturned soil was blown into great drifts,some many feet high in places, similar to blown snowdrifts seen in the winter time. History refers to this time period as the Great Dustbowl.

In response to Mr Hansen's statement "isn't it obvious people that if you metal detect a site and take artifacts, there is no record of it. You found it and took it. Sure you did it with permission, but nothing is recorded". I would have to disagree.

It clearly showed us in the Timeteam episode that we are working with scientists' who accuratly were recording and GPSing the Ft. James site. These artifacts are not just randomly placed somewhere. They are taken to University labs or Archeaology Center's where they can be further studied. These indivduals are trained so in the furture when further questions arise over a site they can go back and look at the previous data. If it were not for archaeolgist's and goverenment people we would not have this information.

The difference between "treasure hunter's" and "archaeolgist's" is that they record data so that future generations will always have access to that information. "Treasure hunter"s" or what I assume you would refer to as "looters" sale things for a profit and do not accurately record data. Archaeolgist's do.

If it were not for scientist's like "evil" archaeolgist's we as people would have many holes left in history. The science of Archaeolgy has given mankind the opportunity to answer many question's about who we are and where we have come from. If it was not for them this would forever remain an unsolved mystery!

It’s nice to see women in the field of archaeology because it inspires me and makes me think that I can become one too. Julie, Chelsea, and Meg are my favorites! They’re smart and funny and great role models for young scientists like me. I can’t wait for more.

A very good show. It is surprising that the area has not been worked over before...by pros or pot hunters. However, I was left with a couple of nagging questions in relation to the excavation of the well inside the fort. Why were there so many objects in the well? Offerings certainly don't factor in. It is unlikely that there were attempts to "poison" the well. Was the water in the well potable or was it ultimately a hole in the ground for dumping refuse? There was a, possibly, related comment about the number of people in the colony who died early on and speculation that contaminated water might have been an issue. Was the well extent during that period of time? It would be good to have a context if someone out there has informed insights. Thanks.

There you go again. Now it is "pot hunters" and "treasure hunters". If some of you would try to look beyond the prejudice and disinformation being so freely thrown about by academic archaeologists and their friends you would see that other diggers are often nice people who enjoy a history-based hobby. Heck, most of us don't even "sale" what we find (and we don't sell it either.) We collect artifacts and, as I said last week, probably do a lot more to educate the public than the academics with their degrees and government-supported jobs. (And no, I don't think the government is "evil" to support professional archaeologist. It is just that the official backing too often translates into a holier-than-thou attitude.) Yes, the academics record every little detail, but please tell me what information of any REAL value is derived from measuring the exact location of a chicken bone in a privy hole? Anyone? (An interesting factoid for the uninitiated: privy holes are, in many cases, used for long periods of time and some items are thrown in long after their manufacture or use; thus, context is of reduced importance because the items are frequently anachronistic, such as an iron pontil pop bottle from 1860 in a privy dating to 1910. It, as they say, happens.) The vast majority of hobby diggers are well aware of the law and which sites have real value. We avoid Native American sites and sites of REAL value such as Jamestown. I also know that many diggers, myself included, do record where and when we dig artifacts, which probably has as much value, in relation to a pioneer privy hole, as the more meticulous notes made by the academic.

And to answer the question about the Jamestown well (which information most diggers know): wells are often rich in artifacts. Items are dropped in on purpose to hide or dispose of them or for who-knows-what other reason; when a well is abandoned it is often filled with rubbish; items are dropped in by accident; many people did not realize that they would taint the water by throwing things in the well. Most of the English explorers who arrived at Jamestown in 1607 didn't know about the germ theory of disease much beyond the common knowledge that you could foul a well by throwing a dead critter or two in. Abandoned wells are second only to privy holes as productive digging sites.

If the archaeologists and their apologists would drop their hostility and engage diggers in civil discourse they might learn many things. Of course there are "pros" who can and do stoop to digging Native American sites and graves for commercial gain, but please don't try to paint all hobby diggers and metal detector people with the same brush. You are doing many nice people a serious injustice. A little less territoriality and more congeniality would do nicely to start a useful exchange of ideas and information. Heck, we might even give the archaeologists tips on where to find good sites. They must want that information, since their common complaint is that other diggers beat them to it.

That's absurd. the archaeology community has skewed so much info on these sites . even the federal and state archs. it is in violation of the freedom of information laws. archaeologists do not own private property . If the owner wishes to have others than, pretentious college kids poke around their site that, is their prerogative.

I have to wonder how many arrowheads and bullets the time team members take home for their personal collections? I also wonder how they would answer the question, why they can have those things but Joe Citizen should not.

Well said Boyd!

I would like to chime in on the "looter" debate That followed the Fort James episode of time team.

First, I can assure you that none of the Time Team members kept artifacts from any of the the digs. Believe it or not our desire is to gain knowledge not objects. I know it sounds like hoooey but it is true!

I think most archaeologists make a distinction between "looters" and what we call avocational archaeologists. I have given dozens of lectures to and worked with avocational groups around the country. There are plenty of archaeological societies and groups doing competent archaeology as a hobby due to an interest in history. One thing we clearly all share! The difference is in technique. When we come across a site that is pock-marked with small holes someone has dug we can see the damage done. usually the back dirt of these holes is filled with small fragments of glass and ceramics etc. that were of no value or interest to the digger. This was clearly what was going on at Ft James. To those of us who practice the science and craft of archaeology, each fragment represents a whole object and by recovering these small fragments we get a better idea of the whole picture of what was going on on the site during and after the occupation. To find out how and where and by whom all these objects were being used and how they ended up on the site should be of interest to anyone who professes to have an interest in history.

I for one would be very interested in why a bottle from the 1860's is in a privy from 1910. Maybe it is impossible to ever know but often by studying the details it is possible to know and the understanding of history of the site is so much better for it. It is often these anachronistic finds that are key in understanding the history of a site.

Many of the points made in the debate are well taken and believe me, not the first time we've heard them, especially Boyd's point about presentations to school kids, nursing homes etc that many collectors do.

I have a long record of doing Public Archaeology. I became involved in the show to help bring archaeology and history to as many people as possible and I think this is true of the whole team. The results of our digs were shared with millions of people this summer. I would have to give a lot of lectures and presentations to get those kind of numbers.

There will always be a place in archaeology for anyone interested in what we can learn from the buried past. But to someone (me) who has worked for over 30 years to learn the craft of proper archaeology and seen the information gleaned from proper excavation techniques, people who callously hog into archaeological sites in search for items to sell or trade are destroying the context of the artifacts and looting the sites.

Thanks
Eric Deetz

I would like to chime in on the "looter" debate That followed the Fort James episode of time team.

First, I can assure you that none of the Time Team members kept artifacts from any of the the digs. Believe it or not our desire is to gain knowledge not objects. I know it sounds like hoooey but it is true!

I think most archaeologists make a distinction between "looters" and what we call avocational archaeologists. I have given dozens of lectures to and worked with avocational groups around the country. There are plenty of archaeological societies and groups doing competent archaeology as a hobby due to an interest in history. One thing we clearly all share! The difference is in technique. When we come across a site that is pock-marked with small holes someone has dug we can see the damage done. usually the back dirt of these holes is filled with small fragments of glass and ceramics etc. that were of no value or interest to the digger. This was clearly what was going on at Ft James. To those of us who practice the science and craft of archaeology, each fragment represents a whole object and by recovering these small fragments we get a better idea of the whole picture of what was going on on the site during and after the occupation. To find out how and where and by whom all these objects were being used and how they ended up on the site should be of interest to anyone who professes to have an interest in history.

I for one would be very interested in why a bottle from the 1860's is in a privy from 1910. Maybe it is impossible to ever know but often by studying the details it is possible to know and the understanding of history of the site is so much better for it. It is often these anachronistic finds that are key in understanding the history of a site.

Many of the points made in the debate are well taken and believe me, not the first time we've heard them, especially Boyd's point about presentations to school kids, nursing homes etc that many collectors do.

I have a long record of doing Public Archaeology. I became involved in the show to help bring archaeology and history to as many people as possible and I think this is true of the whole team. The results of our digs were shared with millions of people this summer. I would have to give a lot of lectures and presentations to get those kind of numbers.

There will always be a place in archaeology for anyone interested in what we can learn from the buried past. But to someone (me) who has worked for over 30 years to learn the craft of proper archaeology and seen the information gleaned from proper excavation techniques, people who callously hog into archaeological sites in search for items to sell or trade are destroying the context of the artifacts and looting the sites.

Thanks
Eric Deetz

Eric,

Basiclly, you have reitterated the tone of the Ft. James show. your last paragraph still lends me to believe that in your mind anyone who takes anything from a site is a looter. point taken. I'm a looter. I metal detect farm fields with permission, for colonial items. These fields get heavily fertilized as a result, these items are slowly disolving back to their elements. You do not own these fields. Items were taken with permission. therefore they were not "looted". You miss the point only for the sake of demonizeing others who have the same interest as you. The defintion of looting is to take by force or to steal. Your use of the term "looting" is just a plattitude used to villify the hobby collector set. Is it any wonder why we distrust you?

I have a lot of questions about an indian site that I have found on a farm here in NC. I have sole permission to surface hunt. I would love to talk to someone to learn about my finds but, I know if I do I will be strong armed and berated for touching the stuff. We can't trust the archs.

Since the pretentious archaeology set is into petitioning the state and the federal government to preserve every residual remain from busted arrow heads to bottle caps older than 50 years, lets talk about Englands antiquity laws. 300 years old and older not condidered an antiquity, anything older needs to be reported/turned over to the state. and the finder is compensated fair market price. Now that is a perfect antiquity law! not only does the finder benefit but the archaeology set gets to benefit as well. instead of black marketing antiquities there is incientive to turn them over. instead of these items rotting in situ they get to be used for the benefit of the people. its win/win.

I know of several places that the owner will not let achaeologist near. one gentleman had allowed the State of NY to dig his field near the Saratoga battlefield. the students came , dug, left their garbage, and when he complained the farmer was told "we are not required to reclaim excavations". Now, thats pee-poor PR in my opinion. this farmer has cows walking these fields. If they break a leg thats money lost for him.
he will let us "looters" in there all day long we fill our holes we pick up our trash. We act professional.

I have met about 3 "professional" archaeologists over the years. Every one of them has an impressive private collection. I am sure each one of the TT members does too. Maybe not taken from your show sites but, I'm sure they collect as well.

I though I would check in on Time Team, and I am not surprised to find that the argument continues, nor am I surprised that the archaeological community still doesn't understand the merits of cooperation with hobby diggers. Let me put it this way: there are lots of us, and we aren't the thieves you make us out to be. We are also becoming much better at knowing and asserting our right to pursue a lawful hobby on private property. The description of the academic types leaving a farm field full of holes and garbage is very telling. I have filled more holes than I have dug, since most of us understand that permission to dig will be easier to obtain if the owner finds that we leave the property in good condition. Replacing sod, leaving a clean dig site and SHARING the finds with the owner are the standard MO.

Oh, and as to the itty bitty pieces of broken stuff thrown back into the hole -- I don't need to save that stuff to know that the pioneers broke ketchup bottles and china, or that those things were available on the frontier. We need to continue to focus on whether a site yields some knowledge of real value, such as a Native American site, or whether we are saving artifacts of a well understood culture (our own) from further loss. In these tough times, can government continue to fund expensive paint brush and trowel digs by academics who seem suprised that the pioneers used ketchup?

Ya' know Mr. Boyd. I used to subscribe to the archaeology magazine. i was put off after one year. i grew very tired of seeing graves ransacked in the name of science. Evey cover of every issue during the time that I subscribed had a human skeleton on it. In the 30-40 years of old issues of "treasure hunting" magazines that i have collected , I have yet to see a human remain published anywhere.

I think that it is distasteful to rob a grave. those cultures had superstitions about the dead and touching the dead. Now, here come the archs, shovels and trowels in hand disturbing the final resting places of lost civilisations for profit.
very sad.