The article entitled "Greek archaeologists reject call for private firms to manage ancient sites" reflects, once again, ignorance of what I have proposed.
Attached is the actual proposal, but what needs to be stated here is that it refers to ancient sites that are unfenced, unguarded, open to vandalism and illicit digging. For example, at the site of the ancient city of Phlious (Nea Nemea) a few months ago ancient stone thrones were deliberately broken. Is that "the way forward?" If the antiquities of Greece are destroyed in the provinces, can those in the cities be far behind?
Stephen G. Miller
PS The two thrones in the "now" photograph are the two in the rear of the "then" photograph. How much more damage should be done before the antiquities of Greece are protected? And if the protection comes from a profit motive, so what?