Paul Barford wrote
>.....Most modern scholars who have thought on this matter agree that there
is no one past to which we have privileged
>access and produce an
>interpretation which is immutable in all its details or even finds the
> same reception in different milieux. Our picture of the past is constantly
>changing shape and those changes depend on a complexity of factors and not
>just the accumulation of more little bits of "objective evidence". What is
>the truth, whose truth is the one which is accepted and why?
Until someone invents a time machine and it is possible to go back and ask
the builders/communities involved in creating the archaeological evidence
which we interpret and re-interpret, there can be no definitive answers to
these intriguing remnants of the past.
"for those who honour the past but love living in the present"