#CLST6 #RR21 I've been amazed at how much of archaeology is dependent on #context. Preserving + cataloguing context seems to be one of the hardest parts of field excavation--but it's all worth it when the context tells you the TRUE story of the artifacts ( https://twitter.com/FlintDibble/status/1163435944642588673?s=20) https://twitter.com/FlintCLST6/status/1327689908488708096

In other fields, the importance of context can be equally crucial but appears less obvious, leading people to undervalue context. That's why having archaeology training is so helpful, I think.

For ex., the context in which stats are found will show their biases--a stat from CNN will have a diff. bias than one from CBS. Just as artifacts shown in Kleiner vs. Stansbury-O'Donnell are be presented differently--for ex., see one of my memes: ( https://twitter.com/AciliaClst6/status/1328218658838106113?s=20)

I originally found this sculpture in Kleiner, which presented the Roman copy of it. But in Stansbury-O'Donnell, which is obviously more Greek-skewed--it is a Greek Art textbook after all :) --it might not even mention the later Roman copy.

Another ex: reading this article w/o the humorous context results in a totally different conclusion.
https://twitter.com/FlintCLST6/status/1327683331551596544?s=20
(Which is why the second comment is crucial to readers not familiar w/ The Onion.)

Even though the difference btw material context and literary context seem very different, the underlying principles of both are the same: observe and record the reliable vs. unreliable; gather a lot of info before coming to a final conclusion;+ lack of discernment = major issues!