If he appears on television - is he not therefore a TV archaeologist? I do not subscribe to the view that television archaeology is of low value or quality. Some maybe.
Mike Parker Pearson is impressive when he keeps away from the easy "ritual" explanation. I do not sneer at him because he appears on the telly, but I did not find his Madagascan view of Stonehenge convincing.
Similarly - his currnt work at Durrington is impressive, but not his interpretation of the"ritual" road to the river and the pick up point to Stonehenge just around the bend.
I mean no insult when I say that I disagree or am unconvinced by an archaeologist holding forth on television, but he is a "TV archaeo" nevertheless. And the ritualising ones give me the pip.
|