Archaeology is so often misspelled in news stories, as it is here. I'm surprised that the word was misspelled so many times, as was archaeologist, and the editors didn't catch it. When writing about or for science, or about anything outside one's field, journalists and editors need to take that extra time to verify and CQ the verbiage. Credibility is at stake for the publication.
Schwendler is right to caution those without archaeological experience or expertise against undertaking their own excavations without an anthropologist's oversight. Important historical or forensic information could be lost forever. Schwendler quotes "What is important is not what you find, but what you find out." One complaint that I have here is in regard to the amount of space given to the speculations about the objects and the possible stories behind them, esp. the broken tureen and complete teacup. Any number of postulations could be assigned to the objects found therein, so I find the reporting about "maybe this or that happened" to be excessive.
Caveats aside, interesting substance to the story.