[Aztlan] Query: Mesoamerican Colleague Protocol

[S.A. Morris]

Measure twice, cut once. Sorry about the protocol statement nested in my
response to the "Cascajal 900BCE text structure" post. It was not intended
to be posted as part of that response.



"Hence why I asked the protocol questions. An amateur is not recognized as a
colleague, unless sponsored by a professional. Otherwise the amateur is
ignored and their unpublished notes absorbed and listed as part of the
professional's work. If an amateur is sponsored by a professional (for
noteworthy contributions), they have their name listed alongside the
professionals of the published work."



Basically, my previous questions of protocol were/are to find the best steps
an amateur can take to submit their findings and be recognized for their
contribution.



There is a basic ISO (International Standards of Operation) used by 'most'
Professionals in the field of Archeology. Used between Professionals. This
is not the case with Amateurs.



I should correct my use of the (widely used) general term Amateur
Archaeologist and replace it with Avocational Archaeologist. There is a
difference between the two. An Avocational Archaeologist may not meet the
formal qualifications to be considered a "Professional" Archaeologist, but
are individuals who have developed a serious interest in conducting
archaeological research and in sharing the results of their work with
others. Amateur i.e. collectors, looters and pot-hunters should not be
confused with the term Avocational. Research projects developed by
Avocational Archaeologists have contributed significantly to the
understanding of the past and will continue to be an integral part
of archaeological research.



Yes it is true, 'any' Amateur can call themselves an Avocationalist. There
are no ISO's regulated at this time.  It is by acknowledged respect of the
Professionals one can officially claim title to Avocational Archaeologist.
This is usually backed by published material, partial, joint or solely.



My personal dilemma comes with making contact with Professionals in
specified fields. Take for instance the Cascajal Block. It is not part of
the research I have been privately conducting, more along the lines of an
interesting Commercial Break. Reading the articles, looking at photos,
following intuitive ideas, foraging through agricultural information,
familiarizing self with codexes and celts, all the while adding to a growing
list of questions.  Can I prove my ideas are justifiable? Can I conclude my
ideas are just hogwash? How can I seriously conduct a qualified research
without even knowing the size of the icons on the stone? How deep are the
incisions? Why did the Archaeologist submit a hand drawn photo of the icons
instead of something more technically advanced? Where is the original
report? Where the heck can I get my hands on an indexed catalogue, listing
all (so far known) Mesoamerican icons or symbols? I may never find the
answers to even a few of these questions.



I am a 14 year US Navy Veteran of Oceanographic Acoustics Technology. My
concentration of personal research for the past few years has been with
Middle Eastern Archaeometallurgy. I'm not as familiar with the Mesoamerican
field and its Professionals. I will be moving to the State of Yucatan next
year and sure to find myself continuing in the research role of a Sherlock
Holmes, but this time looking for leads and answers to specific questions of
Mesoamerica and its cousins.



So here I am, knocking at the door of a new research field and not even
knowing where the doorbell is located.

Arthur