Dear Dan Snow,
I hope you are well, and had a restorative Christmas with
your family. I'm really sorry to be writing what may seem like a snarky open
letter to you, particularly so soon after the season of goodwill has ended. I'm
especially sorry to be doing so after so many years of watching and enjoying
many of your programmes. I can remember loving them as a teenager, so it is
with a heavy heart that I'm writing this blog post.
What’s happened to spark this off? Well, on Wednesday night my
husband decided he wanted to watch a programme presented by you- Rome’s Lost
Empire. I was working on one side of the room, he was enthroned on the sofa. I
was happily cracking on with my work, blathering on about Etruscan pots and
checking a bibliography, when I heard these words come out of your mouth. They
may not be 100% verbatim, but I feel that the below is an accurate account of
your meaning:
“That’s what they do
in archaeology school for 3 years.”
You were referring to your disbelief that an archaeologist
could pick up a pottery fragment, and reliably date it on site. While I
appreciate that you were trying to relate how impressed you were, this really
got me going. That’s not what we do in archaeology school for 3 years. Most
archaeological experts have gained their knowledge over at least 7 years at
university, and many more years of continuing practitioner development. Most
university courses, too, are not just focused on pottery identification skills-
it’s about putting the objects you’ve learned to identify in context in the lives of the people who used them. So, in one
sentence, you brilliantly downplayed the hard work, training and years of
dedication that most archaeologists put in to get to where they are, de-valuing
their skills effortlessly. As President of the CBA, you should know better.
I was mollified shortly afterwards by the appearance on the
programme of archaeologists for whom I have the greatest respect, my doctoral
adviser, Simon Keay, among them. My head went back to chasing down that pesky Studi Etruschi article. Then I heard you
say this to one of your co-presenters, the very woman whose work on remote
sensing had led you to many of the sites in the programme and revealed so many
new features:
“Take your head out of
your computer… this is what it’s all about.”
Wow. So all those hours spent researching, poring over data,
pulling it together, working her arse off to find new sites, and then her
generosity in sharing that data with you, to say nothing of her time- it’s not
important. What’s important is to wander around in the desert gazing into the
middle distance, crashing through the dunes in a 4x4. Obviously, archaeology is
all about pretending to be a great adventurer, and not about the long hours of
research and analysis that all of us put in before sticking a trowel in the
ground. Again, you effortlessly sidelined the reality of archaeological
research, and once again, you should know better.
I know lots of people
on Twitter and elsewhere were unhappy with the production values of the
programme, but I don’t think that’s down to you at the end of the day. What you
say to camera is. So, I’d be really grateful if you could think about the
effect your comments have on public perceptions of archaeology, and how they
make us archaeologists feel.
Thank you.