The paper emphasizes the importance of chronology in Pacific archaeology and the need to answer basic questions of culture history before speculating on other aspects of archaeology. The author argues that chronology-building is essential for theory-building in Pacific archaeology and that resolving chronological issues is necessary to understand the causes and consequences of cultural change in the region. The paper highlights the controversies and debates among archaeologists, historians, and art critics regarding the dating of ancient tombs and the impact of these differences on personal relationships and academic discourse. The author also mentions the importance of considering different chronologies in interpreting cultural change and provides examples where different chronologies lead to different interpretations.