30th December 2012, 11:09 AM
Very cynical article. His bit about "why we do this" in particular.
Of course people like finding stuff better than recording/preserving it. But so long as the latter is done to the best of our ability (and provision for that is managed before any finding is done!), why shouldn't we do the former if we're learning as a result?
And just because a site is unexcavated doesn't mean it'll survive equally well now as it has the past hundreds/thousands of years. I think his ideas on technology are a little far-fetched, too.
Re: the mummy, how much information can actually be obtained from a completely dessicated corpse inside a (presumably) stone sarcophagus?
There's another Roman bath house closer to home which is also decaying without proper preservation: Beauport Park.
Of course people like finding stuff better than recording/preserving it. But so long as the latter is done to the best of our ability (and provision for that is managed before any finding is done!), why shouldn't we do the former if we're learning as a result?
And just because a site is unexcavated doesn't mean it'll survive equally well now as it has the past hundreds/thousands of years. I think his ideas on technology are a little far-fetched, too.
Re: the mummy, how much information can actually be obtained from a completely dessicated corpse inside a (presumably) stone sarcophagus?
There's another Roman bath house closer to home which is also decaying without proper preservation: Beauport Park.