4 ms·

>> "As of 2021, less than 5% of the site had been excavated."

• sidewndr46 2y ago
  My conclusion was the sites aren't excavated because they aren't really that interesting. They are all similar in nature and don't contain extensive written knowledge that can be preserved and studied. To put it comparatively Ötzi the iceman is highly studied because preserved bodies aren't found from his era and location that often. If we stumbled across a graveyard with 10000 people from the same era that was easily accessible, I doubt we'd spend much time studying all of them. As another poster has pointed out, there may in fact be a writing system that we are just beginning to understand. So I'll have to see if there is anything I can try and learn there.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • masklinn 2y ago
    The sites are absolutely interesting, however unless pressed for time (usually because they're in the way of or uncovered by construction work) archaeological digs are slow going: the slower you are the more artifacts you can find, the better you can place them, and the better you can preserve them and the rest of the site. Used to be people dynamited sites to get at stuff faster (also dynamite colleague's sites to undermine them). We stopped doing that, because it was stupid and wasteful. Furthermore protecting and stabilising the site been a major focus of recent site coordinators, especially as the site has been opened up more for public visits. If you want faster digs, fund archeological grants so there's more money to hire more people.