Well- it IS concrete evidence of facts... the problem is that at best we
only find out a little about what those facts may have been.

I have always thought that the dirty facts of history are what really
speak to the humanity of the people who produced what we are trying to
understand. When we think of archaeological deposits as being produced
by social processes we are missing the point, and often making
"unwarranted assumptions" as a blacksmith friend has accused us of
doing. It is individuals acting in a social environment that produce
archaeological deposits, and we all know lots of people who do not
behave in socially normal ways.

Likewise we all know of plenty of people who have made life decisions
from bad to evil. Like history, one of the functions of archaeology is
to remind us that we are human and we need to consider the ramifications
of our behavior.  If we "clean up" the past we are doing a disservice to
future generations.  

>>> [log in to unmask] 07/11/06 11:44 AM >>>
                                                                       
   
             g                                                         
   
                                                                       
   
                                                                       
   
                                                                       
   
                                                                       
   
                                                                       
   







another minor ethical dilemna; i sometimes look at archaeology as being
a
means for providing concrete evidence of "facts" that might otherwise
disappear down the "memory hole"

Archaeology provides "...concrete evidence of facts...?

Since when?

This is an interesting statement to ponder.

Based upon what I've learned in arch classes, what winds up being
deposited
or preserved in the archaeologcial records, whether it be what folks
decide
to selelctively discard or what the depositional environment allows to
be
preserved, could hardly be considered as "...providing concrete
evidence of
fact..."

Perhaps I read the statement to literally.

Carl Barna
Lakewood, CO
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060710.wxnote10-4/BNStory/Entertainment/home