The discussion on archaeology's nature, destiny and philosophy, which the Editor wants me to continue (1973, 93), might risk becoming a bore unless I am brief. I will try to be. The prior articles he mentions, of course, are only the three most recent; he has printed others earlier, and now has added further letters (93-5) from Drs Salway, Myres and Webster. The best of the articles certainly seems to me to be Cecil Hogarth's (1972, 301-4). But I sympathize with David Clarke, in his 'Archaeology: the loss of innocence' (1973, 6-18), because of his scorn of claimed results from 'instinctive excavations', of the 'immortalization of subjective classifications', and of people who come to constitute 'élites'. Instinctively, even if innocently, I greatly want to agree.