Religious object or a toy? Another classic example of bad guesswork

Posted On: May 18th, 2018 at 12:55

Israel / France / Spain / The World
Following on from my many previous posts about the ridiculous guesswork employed by some archaeologists to try and look as if they know everything, here we have another classic example whereby guesswork completely misleads everyone and actually gives us a false history.
Like the constant “ritual” excuse for findings like burials that don’t have an explanation, many objects have been misinterpreted as “ritual” or “religious” objects when in fact they are children’s toys. I have posted previously about this very issue and the site in Israel mentioned in the article. In fact it is a recurring theme that needs to be addressed immediately.
Misinterpreting a toy as a religious object has massive implications for our understanding of the past and our ancestors. In fact, when it comes to understanding our history, this is as important as it can get. Misinterpretation has led to generations of people believing in something that was completely untrue, and to be so far off the mark that today we wonder how these propositions ever made it to the academic table. Take the canals on Mars, for example – that turned out to be a misinterpretation of the language used.
When Giovanni Virginio Schiaparelli (1835 – 1910) noted that he observed “canali” on Mars through his telescope, one observer interpreted that as “canals”. What followed was a long-held belief that there was life on Mars, inhabited by three-eyed, green beings. In fact “canali” simply means “channels”. All it took was for one respected scholar to misinterpret a single word and an entire generation or three held on to a belief that turned out to be utterly false. It wasn’t until the Mariner programme in the 1960s that the idea that life still existed on Mars was finally put to bed. But that wasn’t before Hollywood had made many films of Martians invading earth and stealing human females, ensuring many a small child and possibly adults had nightmares and sleepless nights for years.
And so a child’s toy misinterpreted as a religious object can also have huge implications for archaeology.
My example may be extreme, but in many ways it is not – a simple misinterpretation of an object, or an entire site, can bring about a completely false paradigm and this is very dangerous indeed.
I reiterate my point that it is extremely important for archaeologists and others to not make any guesses about what they find. If they don’t know what something is then it’s about time they started to come clean and admit that they don’t know. History does no favours for those who are badly wrong, and it certainly is not good for the rest of us who trust these people to provide us with valid information.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-toys-kids-archaeological-record