4 ms·
As exciting as it is to make archaeological discoveries, one benefit of not allowing archaeological digs is that you're preserving what's under that dirt for fu
by leviathant 6y ago
As exciting as it is to make archaeological discoveries, one benefit of not allowing archaeological digs is that you're preserving what's under that dirt for future archaeologists who may have better techniques and tools, operating under a friendlier government.
I say that in a complete vacuum with respect to Turkey. I'm guessing disallowing archaeological digs is has less to do with conservation & preservation and more to do with not getting in the way of real estate developers. I live in Philadelphia (Pennsylvania, not Alaşehir), where it's not that archaeological digs aren't allowed, but the trouble is that such digs are not mandated in the historical sections of the city, and as a result, so much history gets carted away in dump trucks.
- danielfoster 6y agoNot sure how often this is followed but I read once while studying Roman history that best practice is to only excavate part of a site so that future generations can access it with better technology.
- anticensor 6y ago> archaeological digs is has less to do with conservation & preservation and more to do with not getting in the way of real estate developers In Turkey, building stops if any archaeological finding is found in the process, until they come in and resolve the situation of the ruin. This may even lead to cancellation of the building project.