Perhaps we are afraid that we would be guilty of "hoodoo" by
association?
The belief that such a thing as hard proof is necessary for any
archaeological interpretation to be acceptable
entirely negates the value of informed speculation. We would not have
much progress in the field if we needed hard proof of everything before
we could move on.
Perhaps it is because we depend so much on the material aspects of
culture that we find the sloppiness of belief and symbolism abhorrent.
>>> [log in to unmask] 08/25/06 1:54 PM >>>
When I commented on finding the hat and boot in the U.S. Army barracks
chimney the other day, I failed to mention the construction crew were
English
Americans. The practice that I spoke of had nothing to do with African
Americans.
There is also a report of a pair of shoes found in the rafters of
Notre Dame
with a note from the man who erected the roof structure, indicating he
wanted his spirit to protect his work after he was gone.
Strangely, the biggest critics and nay-sayers of these ritual features
are
archaeologists. Why is that? What threatens American archaeologists in
the
discovery of these features? Why is it they demand we interpret
concealment
features as simple trash dumps?
Ron May
Legacy 106, Inc.