25 Aug
1999
25 Aug
'99
4:01 a.m.
> Well, archeology was, and still _is_ about value,
and I'm not
> talking about anything beside money. Just look at your news.
> If theres a stupid pile of roman silver, it's top news and
> it gets a lot of attention. The historic value is zero, but
> it's silver - on the other side, it needs a earth shaking
> discovery (like the Keltic statue two years ago) just to
> have a few lines...
Non sequitur, I think. I agree that the news coverage
bears this out well, but
I don't agree that this is the opinion of _any_ serious archaeologist, amateur
or professional, of my acquaintance.
Not any, but I doubt that there is a higher percentage of
'good' guys than anywhere else.
I think that news coverage is about money. The money
mentality that pervades so
much of our society means that the newspapers measure the importance of
_anything_ they don't actually understand by the amount of money involved.
Agreed.
Money is as relevant to archaeologists as it is to the
rest of us, but I don't
think it is the main driver for most, or even many, of the people who do
significant work in this field.
Well, I learned to belive more into the dark side.
PS I don't recall hearing about this Celtic statue
- can you point me to more
detail?
I'm just about to search for sources (Paxton also asked).
--
Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK