This is true - for instance, Gobekli Tepe gets all the attention nowadays, but before it, there were several other significant Neolithic sites nearby - Nevalı Çori, Çayönü Tepesi, and probably others I don’t know of - where excavation was made impossible by a dam. Who know what other important sites now sit under Lake Atatürk.
When I visited Pompeii* there were huge sections of the city still completely unexcavated, They were leaving it pretty much undisturbed for future archaeologists to uncover, recognizing that new techniques would undoubtedly become available.
On the other hand, you do have to strike a balance. If they hadn’t performed the excavations they had, we’d know very little about Pompeii. Practical archaeology advances through such work, and it trains the young archaeologists who will use potential future techniques. Like any discipline, archaeology is a living discipline, and there’s not much to be gained by relegating it to cold storage until some hypothetical future time – skills and “black arts” knowledge will atrophy and be lost.
*Ages ago, it seems. I think it was maybe a few weeks after the eruption
The ruins and artifacts also produce a HUGE amount of revenue that goes towards preservation and future exploration, as when I was there last year, I think the cheapest admission level was somewhere around $20.00, USD.
“I’m sure that everything you do for the museum conforms to the International Treaty for the Protection of Antiquities.”
Stranger
And the recent flurry of excavations, including the one that led to last week’s announcement of the possible re-dating of the eruption of Vesuvius, don’t actually contradict that. One major element in the Great Pompeii Project that is now nearing completion has been several small-scale excavations undertaken to protect already excavated buildings adjacent to the unexcavated areas. Excavating only one side of a wall isn’t always a good idea. These new excavations have been necessary precisely because there are currently no plans to excavate the rest of the unexcavated areas.
Reinforcing what others have said about other countries, excavations in the UK are now mostly rescue archaeology. That’s a case where a ploy to get the government off the hook over funding (developers have to pay instead) very conveniently coincided with already changing attitudes among professional archaeologists.
In addition to what everyone else has said, when those new techniques are developed, they’ll have to be calibrated, and to do that, you have to compare the results of the new techniques to those of the old techniques for at least a few artifacts. Which means that you still need to do the old techniques.
You also need some artifacts in order to glean enough information to be able to determine what you are detecting. If you do not have information about what you are looking for with your perfect detectors then it is unlikely you will ever know what you are looking for - and this knowledge will never be discovered.
Much of archeology is not actually new material, it is understanding volumes of artifacts and sources, and these can be used to evaluate trade connections, population sizes etc.
In other words it is about context.
Leaving artifacts buried also precludes research upon them, for example fossilised remains of collagen have been recovered and this technique is pretty much in its infancy - leaving all such material buried would be an immense handicap to such research, partly because it may well turn out that breakthrough will initially be made with serendipitous conditions, and once such a breakthrough has been made further research will enable even more development.
I’m just happy when my cairns don’t get shot up or knocked down the day after I build them.
Experts in the field have already acted on the opposite presumption:
https://traveltoeat.com/gobekli-tepe-archeology-site-turkey/
Thank you! The “value” of artifacts lies in what they can teach us about a specific culture or era in history. Other than that, they’re just a bunch of old things buried under the ground unseen and unappreciated.
What you haven’t explained to my satisfaction is what great goal will be achieved by leaving these artifacts underground and out of sight.
A structure like Stonehenge I can understand because it was constructed ON TOP of the ground. I’m totally with you on something like that, but not for stuff that will never ever be seen again much less appreciated unless it is brought to light and somehow displayed somewhere.
Do you really want someone digging up artifacts owned by an SJW liberal mother-in-law and those diggers that she was that type of woman (like a headstone or plaque describing it)?
There’s really no difference between destroying them or leaving them underground. Either way no one can see them, no one can benefit from them, no one can learn anything from them. Not to mention that if you declare areas where artifacts may be buried “untouchable”, you’ve effectively rendered the land they’re buried in useless.
Slight side track, but what are the odds that you are sitting on an archaeological sight right now?
It seems we got pretty much everywhere, and one thing that I have observed about humans is that we are messy and wasteful, and we leave trash everywhere.
Is there a discarded broken clay pot buried by time, sitting 25 feet below me right now?
Do you know anything about George Washington? Probably yes.
Have you ever met George Washington? Certainly no.
I would propose that in-person, physical contact is not the sole way to learn about a subject.
Most people studying ancient writings, for example, are working off a photograph of the item. Did the photo destroy anything? No. What about if the way they researched the letter was to take an x-acto knife and cut out all of the letters and glue them to a piece of paper to pass around to everyone? Maybe you’ve preserved the bulk of the letters, but you could have lost a subtext that was erased and written over, you may have discarded of drops of wax, blood, spittle, etc. that would have been of interest. You’re now handing around the actual item, having people put their hands all over it, rubbing away at layers and covering the text with modern contaminants.
If I told you, in 1800, to hold off cutting away at that letter and to just wait 39 years so we have technology (photography) to take a record of the thing in a non-destructive way, you’d say that I was just being fantastical. But I’d be correct. Failing to wait until we can analyze the thing non-destructively is just impatience.
The thing is though, that all progress builds on what came before. You don’t develop new magical technologies without the baby steps it takes to get there I’m afraid. If we’d skipped developing pagers, would we have gotten to cell phones?
Every age is constrained by current knowledge. As soon as we know better, we can do better.
Stopping in our tracks, because surely the future promises better tech, also stops the stages of tech it takes to reach what you’re dreaming of, I think.
That’s not the way it works. Slavery kept the South behind, technologically, because why bother developing better technology when you can just throw manpower at it?
Inventiveness comes out of adversity. Tell people that they need to use sensor technology to do their investigation and you’ll get all sorts of new techniques flowing out of the woodwork.
Well I can see at least an ethical quandary about digging up burial grounds or pyramids and whatnot. As a side character in Tintin said, “What would we say if a bunch of Egyptians came here to dig up the graves of our kings ?”. These people lived, and did things, and died and their loved ones gave them ritual burials to signify their love. It all had meaning, which we still recognize to this day when we bury our loved ones (or when we express outrage at anybody disturbing the dead), so in this particular case it’s not “just old bones”. At the same time, as an historian I really want to know whose old bones those are and how they lived and died… If the fuckers didn’t wanna get dug up, they oughta have written all that down to save us the trouble, the jerks.
But pots and pans, buried houses, rusted armor, forgotten statues ? It’s just the junk and dross of centuries. It doesn’t do anybody any good under 5 tons of silt.
Yeah, if only someone had told the Wright brothers they were forbidden to try their machine until it used turbojets and complied with 2018 OSHA standards, imagine how advanced planes would be today ! We’d have skipped hundreds of years of slow, incremental improvements !
So your argument is that there was no adversity in the development of heavier-than-air flight? It was a simple problem, with scarcely a thing to make it a challenge?