this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
9 points (100.0% liked)

Archaeology

6 readers
1 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest news, stories, and developments in archaeology. Whether you are an archaeologist yourself, or simply interested in the subject and the human past, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on archaeological topics, as well as topics of the historical record, and more. While we try to keep the focus on stories and discussions with scientific basis, thought experiments are welcome. If there is something you’re interested in and this seems the place to discuss it, or if you’re simply not sure of the distinction, don’t shy away! Join the conversation and let's explore the world of archaeology together!

founded 1 year ago
 

Archaeologists hail ‘exceptional finds’ at venue whose existence was previously known only from mentions in ancient texts

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Chriszz@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Officials said the movable antiquities would be taken to a museum, while the ruins of the theatre structure itself would be covered again after all studies were completed.

Why?? Why not make it into a museum or somewhere you can visit instead of building a hotel

[–] SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

This is a fair question that is worth discussing. The short answer, is because that generally requires money and resources long-term that are not already available or allocated during the course of the dig.

Covering exposed features is the only way to “protect” them from the elements, and from the public. Furthermore, it also leaves open the possibility of uncovering them in the future for additional research or examination. This is actually a common practice in archaeology, much more than people realize.

Which bring us to the fact that the purpose of archaeology as a science, is not to protect every uncovered feature or even every discovered artefact, but to use these materials and their placement in situ to gain knowledge and insight into the human past. As such, the material objects are often of little value unless entirely unique, no museum or archive has endless storage for every object recovered. In fact, artefacts discovered on digs that cannot be added to some collection and are of a known factor, are usually discarded en masse and reburied.

It’s possible that what you’re suggesting could happen in the future, but that would require planning, funding, and time for it to happen. Without covering up the site now to protect it the way it has been found, there wouldn’t be time for any future planning or funding to even allow that decision.

[–] Chriszz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That makes sense. Thanks for the answer

[–] tiredofsametab@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Yep. Archaeology in many forms is destructive by nature. It can be better to wait for technological advances in the future that can tell us even more rather than attacking a site all at once.