Archaeology is a destructive science. Therefore it requires utmost attention, patience and care. A shipwreck, from the moment it goes down, until discovered by mankind, stays untouched for years, perhaps centuries, such as in the case of 3300 years old Uluburun shipwreck. Until an excavator starts to work on the wreck, all the evidence, complete, is there on the bottom, as precise as the first moment it went down. Yet, when we start to excavate and remove artifacts, we also start to destroy that precise evidence for once and for all. If we are not careful, and record every possible detail, a cultural heritage that stayed intact for centuries can be lost within seconds.
When an excavator starts to excavate, there are conflicting realities for him/her. On one hand the wish and intention to work carefully and precisely. On the other hand, there is limited time and very limited funds, so he/she has to work as efficiently and effectively as possible. The goal turns out to be excavate and learn the most in limited time with limited funds. So this is the conflict that always haunts an excavator; one has to work fast when the finds are not significant, yet slow down as much as necessary when there is an object of importance.
Let's take the example of the unknown artifacts in the picture below that are fused together. What are these pieces? Anything worth extra time to spend on it? Does it warrant a lengthy and slow excavation? Or should one move fast and invest the valuable time on another artifact that may yield more from a lengthy excavation?
Knowledge always helps wisdom to know the difference is what is really important. I wish I had more.