Home of the The Hall of Ma'at on the Internet
Home
Discussion Forums
Papers
Authors
Web Links

May 6, 2024, 1:12 pm UTC    
August 14, 2001 10:07AM
<HTML>100% agreement in real world applications, Mikey.

I am far more concerned with pure theory here, though.

From a strictly theoretical standpoint, frankly, the sciences are crossing INTO archaeology in order to help archaeology with it's assembly of the puzzle. These are not part of the archaeological science, itself.

And John is right about the jet nose-diving. You could get the same thing with a burial site, too. In these cases, his contemporaneous contextual evidence is paramount... but only in that it helps to create the sequence... not in that it changes the measurements.

In my opinion, the logical sequence (theoretically) IS the whole thing in archaeology. Everything else is simply support science.

Anthony</HTML>
Subject Author Posted

Repeatability in archaeology

Martin Stower August 14, 2001 06:47AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 08:09AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Mikey Brass August 14, 2001 08:36AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 09:02AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

John Wall August 14, 2001 09:12AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Mikey Brass August 14, 2001 09:14AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 10:07AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Stephen Tonkin August 14, 2001 10:41AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 02:26PM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Mikey Brass August 14, 2001 08:34AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 09:07AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Mikey Brass August 14, 2001 09:25AM

Re: Repeatability in archaeology

Anthony August 14, 2001 02:29PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login