The debate over the first feast from a cave in Israel (discussed here earlier) has continued. Now the evidence has been turned into a nice narrative and even been illustrated. While I do appreciate a good story, and understand that the popularization of archaeology is somewhat important in gaining more funding and publicity, is it maybe at the sake of our supposed scientific grounding?
The problem is not the telling of the story, but the way that it is framed as being the ‘truth’. The public doesn’t sort out the difference between our interpretations and fact. As experts, we are presumed to always be revealing fact. My fear is that in telling these ‘stories’ we may lose our credibility. We have a duty to be explicit about what was excavated and that the narratives stemming from it are inferences and interpretations.