More Amphipolis updates

The Lion of Amphipolis
photo: Kkonstan

The Greek Reporter is staying up to date with the reporting of the excavation and theories concerning the tomb at Amphipolis. On March 1st there was a story about the skeleton remains and discussion of the main hypotheses about their identities, and on March 7th came the idea that the lion at Amphipolis was too heavy to have stood on the tomb's mound.

This is really what archaeological news reporting should be about: many archaeological sites had a life somewhat more messy and disorganized than what is thought to be the main story, but the public has come to expect that they will receive the required pronouncements from experts and that will be that. Is this a chicken or the egg question? Do some archaeologists follow previous styles of reporting or is the reporting the result of the hype given by the archaeologist in hope of further funding? Quite often, the reasons for the interpretation are not given. After all, many news organizations feel they are there to give answers, and not more questions.

But archaeology is not about the answers but the questions. Any archaeological site worth its salt will present more questions than answers. If that was not the case, there could be no more advancement on the subject. Sometimes, though, we might wonder if archaeology is mainly about career advancement. Well done to the Greek Reporter for a balanced coverage of the excavations and theories. This is the sort of reporting that promotes an interest to discover more rather than to feel satisfied with the single view so often given for nationalist or career motives.

Still no discussion about the thirteen steps, though.