The tasks of paleontologists and classical historians and archaeologists are remarkably similar - to excavate, decipher and bring to life the tantalizing remnants of a time we will never see.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Through the study of fossils I had already been initiated into the mysteries of prehistoric creations.
Almost all paleontologists recognize that the discovery of a complete transition is in any case unlikely.
Paleoanthropology is not a science that ends with the discovery of a bone. One has to have the original to work with. It is a life-long task.
History is malleable. A new cache of diaries can shed new light, and archeological evidence can challenge our popular assumptions.
When you think about archaeology, archaeology is the only field that allows us to tell the story of 99 percent of our history prior to 3,000 B.C. and writing.
As scientists, we keep an open mind, but we have to base our ideas about the past on archaeological evidence.
Analysis of soil, grave goods and skeletons has been key to our understanding of archaeology and the migration of peoples, as well as their daily lives. But in mainstream history, we tend to stick to documents.
I'm not an academic; I'm not an archaeologist. I'm a writer, communicating ideas to the public. There is a model of how the past is, and a lot of academic archaeology is about refining the model. It's not about changing the model radically. I'm not aware of any current which is about radically changing the model. It's just me, really.
Just as a fossil is 'petrified time,' so is an ancient artifact or text.
I excavate history. I look at lives buried under too much silence. Periods of time, like slavery, have to be revisited, reimagined, so we can move through them.
No opposing quotes found.