I’ll start with the easiest one. This year I really cannot see past one post for this award.
Why were Greek temples dedicated to certain gods and not others? A recent paper in Antiquity says that the answer lies in the soil.
Bonekickers has limped to the end of its run leaving many questions unanswered, including the big one. Why? Spoilers, and I’m using the word quite wrongly, follow.
I am not being at all sarcastic when I say I’m positive about Bonekickers. The first episode wasn’t brilliant, but first episodes of any series tend to be poor because not only are they introducing a story, they’re introducing characters.
There’s a 1st century BC tablet which has been found predicting a Messiah that will rise after three days. I can’t really see this shaking Christianity by connecting it to Judaism. The whole concept of a Messiah is Jewish.
In 2001 the Taliban destroyed the Buddhas of Bamiyan. Now there’s a proposal to rebuild them, but can they be rebuilt and should they?
There’s an odd debate piece in Antiquity this month between Kristian Kristiansen and Cornelius Holtorf. On the surface it’s about the archaeology as popular culture idea which Holtorf has been developing over the past few years. Unfortunately I’m not sure the debate makes much sense in those terms, but I’m not entirely clear what it is about.
Whitley’s paper is interesting because he hits the gap between the empiricists and relativists in the centre. In doing so he argues that cognitive archaeology need not be subjective and relativist but also that logical positivism is not enough for some archaeological questions.
Christina notes the lack of light and large blocks of text fails to illuminate visitors to Denmark’s National Museum. …but could the point of many prehistoric exhibits be to create uncertainty?