uniface
Silver Member
I know TN is about arrowheads more than about archaeology itself. But since you can't deal with artifacts without it, it ends up being directly involved, unavoidably.
I've run across an essay that makes sense of the rediculous conceptual mess in US archaeology. If you want to understand why basic fact is chronically misreported, misrepresented and censored, it is a must read.
I don't know how to link to it directly, but go to Grey Goose Chronicles and click on "Broken Open" in the articles list to read it. (There's an option to read the articles without subscribing, if youre hesitant). Many of them sound really interesting. (For that matter, you can also subscrbe for free, which I just did).
At the end of the day, the contest is always over who controls the narrative -- over which set of assumptions (esssentially, beliefs) gets to be the "this is what it all means "explanation of it.
FWIW
I've run across an essay that makes sense of the rediculous conceptual mess in US archaeology. If you want to understand why basic fact is chronically misreported, misrepresented and censored, it is a must read.
I don't know how to link to it directly, but go to Grey Goose Chronicles and click on "Broken Open" in the articles list to read it. (There's an option to read the articles without subscribing, if youre hesitant). Many of them sound really interesting. (For that matter, you can also subscrbe for free, which I just did).
At the end of the day, the contest is always over who controls the narrative -- over which set of assumptions (esssentially, beliefs) gets to be the "this is what it all means "explanation of it.
FWIW
Amazon Forum Fav 👍
Last edited:
Upvote
5