..A lot of archeological findings of late have uncovered many ancient records written on tablets.. parchments.. etc...
I wonder how they agree with our take on history????

OOOOPs!!! sorry... editing problem...

Erm, Im not quite sure what your getting at here. are you implying that "history's" view of history and "archaeology's" view of history dont match up? They dont exactly match but thats becouse the whole subject is in a state of contstant flux, each keeps presenting new evidence which means that theories are constantly revisited and updated. In additon each area drives the other. Archaeology provides physicial evidence for the facts of history, but very often the facts of history drawn from other sources tell us where to look for the archaeology and what context to put it in. Whats the difference between a historical source and an archaeological source? A clay tablet found under a field is archaeological evidence of the existance of clay tablets in that area, what the clay tablet has written on it is the historical evidence of whatever the writing is about! Basically anyway.

I have always been taught to be careful about what you read from antiquity. Archaeology will always give the cold, hard facts as mentioned by Torchwood, but written sources are always open to interpretation and will mean different things to different people. Clay tablets detailing Roman ship cargoes are pretty much sound as evidence but a tablet describing an event that took place, or a person that performed a feat needs to be looked at more closely. Julius Caesar was a prime candidate for exaggerating numbers of enemies killed whilst playing down his own casualties (and I am sure this is the case with many leaders throughout history) and the sizes of walls/barriers surmounted are always described as being larger than they actually were - archaeology (where it exists) hasn't always borne these claims out. A prime example of ancient texts being interpreted differently by different people is the Bible (or any ancient religious text for that matter) - this one book has caused so many issues with its different interpretations; however, used as an archaeological guide, it is great for finding all those ancient cities.

Finally, one has to remember that more often than not, history is written by the 'winners' and the 'losers' are confined to the footnotes.