31st January 2007, 10:56 AM
He's been having an archaeological moment. I had some sort of comic rant by email last night. I'll paraphrase his words and keep it clean. It's like a blonde moment, only with slightly longer words.
A village of small houses that may have sheltered the builders of Stonehenge, or people attending festivals there, has been found by archaeologists studying the stone circle. Eight of the houses, with central hearths, have been excavated, and there may be as many as 25 of them, Mike Parker Pearson said yesterday.
Well done, Prof.
With over a hundred years of archaeological education in the UK. With internationally renowned scholars, a very small bit of land called a country, and with a stonking great ancient monument... why is it only now that anyone thinks "Oooh - do you think there might have been some houses near the henges? You know, for workers or worshippers?"
I honestly thought that they would have had a proper look around in the 1920's when they dug up Woodhenge. Failing that, that someone might think in the following 80 odd years to have a look. Why? 'Cos it's basic archaeology, innit?
Considering the basic premise that constructions don't come from nothing, but require people and materials, and that materials had to come from somewhere and that people involved in construction had to live somewhere... shouldn't British archaeology not be so much'celebrating', but looking a bit embarrassed? It's rather like expressing surprise that there's a car park next to a supermarket.
I'm sure there's good reason why this has come about. Nobody wants to take away from the excitement or the glory of the find - but does it strike anyone else that this might indicate that an awful lot gets missed?
I wonder if it's safe to look at my email yet?
- Update: No, he's still ranting.
If I express an opinion, shoot the boss. He's a bad man.
A village of small houses that may have sheltered the builders of Stonehenge, or people attending festivals there, has been found by archaeologists studying the stone circle. Eight of the houses, with central hearths, have been excavated, and there may be as many as 25 of them, Mike Parker Pearson said yesterday.
Well done, Prof.
With over a hundred years of archaeological education in the UK. With internationally renowned scholars, a very small bit of land called a country, and with a stonking great ancient monument... why is it only now that anyone thinks "Oooh - do you think there might have been some houses near the henges? You know, for workers or worshippers?"
I honestly thought that they would have had a proper look around in the 1920's when they dug up Woodhenge. Failing that, that someone might think in the following 80 odd years to have a look. Why? 'Cos it's basic archaeology, innit?
Considering the basic premise that constructions don't come from nothing, but require people and materials, and that materials had to come from somewhere and that people involved in construction had to live somewhere... shouldn't British archaeology not be so much'celebrating', but looking a bit embarrassed? It's rather like expressing surprise that there's a car park next to a supermarket.
I'm sure there's good reason why this has come about. Nobody wants to take away from the excitement or the glory of the find - but does it strike anyone else that this might indicate that an awful lot gets missed?
I wonder if it's safe to look at my email yet?
- Update: No, he's still ranting.
If I express an opinion, shoot the boss. He's a bad man.
<hr noshade size=\"1\"><font size=\"2\"><font color=\"purple\"><i>If I express an opinion, shoot the boss. He\'s a bad man.</i></font id=\"purple\"></font id=\"size2\">