David McKivergan seems to think that because I gave a couple of examples
of non-archaeologist decendents of people who made archaeological sites,
that I think THEIR views/information is better/more accurate than the
archaeologists' who have been studying those sites/cultures. This was not
my intention. I was simply providing some examples of
non-professional/uneducated people providing significant input to
archaeological inquiries.  I agree with McKivergan that these are simply
additional sources of input--not the only ones or the best ones.
 
Mary Ellin D'Agostino
[log in to unmask]