> Why would you think de-westernization of archeology has anything to do with it or is even relevant? Because it was mentioned in the article that the original

> Why would you think de-westernization of archeology has anything to do with it or is even relevant? Because it was mentioned in the article that the original discovering western archeologists, who were incredulous that such advanced construction could have come from the 'races' in the era, completely overlooked the fact that these buildings could have been constructed by the local indigenous people, for decades, until a non-western-indoctrinated archeologist came along and provided the counter argument. It was a wealth of information made unavailable to the local culture because of prejudice and bigotry, plain and simple - and this has been seen time and again in western archeology, which is not innocent in the "racist prejudice" department. >I think most people want to find out the truth and that's it. I think it depends whether the truth aligns with your funders goals and purposes or not. Certainly in the 19th and 20th centuries there are countless examples of 'archeology' degrading itself for the purposes of the institutions from where the funds are derived. And even today we still have the heinous situation that cultural artifacts are still 'being protected' in predominantly white european institutions (museums) due to the prejudices of the institutions towards the people from where the artifacts were stolen.