> > 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
Received on Wed Aug 25 1999 - 11:01:43 BST