I’ve technically finished this now. I split the reading experience in two as the format allows for it and the idea of perusing sections over reading the entire thing. Categories are clearly labelled and artefacts/locations of archaeological note given page numbers.
According to its introduction it is a revised and/or updated text and no authors are named on the cover, only the editor. I imagine the list of authors will be listed near the end of the book.
As a book, it is both interesting and fine. Sounds like an insult, maybe, but it is interesting in that it discusses sites and I didn’t know about beforehand and it is only fine in the way that I love context, notes and greater explanation on how a discovery is made. Much in the same way a discovery or artefact is only significant or relevant as evidence when you have all the information - location of discovery, circumstance and manner of its burial/abandonment etc - a significant discovery of knowledge on why or how a group of people lived the way they did works the same way. Give me evidence, excavation history or notes and the significance takes on a greater meaning beyond “cool - how do we know?”
On the other hand, treat it as a gateway into archaeological study and it probably fulfils its purpose.
Travis Elborough does a better job with this approach though, given that I don’t think he is an actual archaeologist and many of these authors might well be.