The definition of archaeology is using the information from analysis of artefacts, the excavation of sites and physical remains to study the human prehistory and history (Oxford Living Dictionaries n.d.) which is similar to the definition given by Renfrew and Bahn (2016, p.12) that archaeology is study of the past society and human from their material culture. The book was written by Renfrew and Bahn (2016, p.13) also suggests that archaeology has two perspectives which are history and science. To some extent, archaeology is different with history, because it rather than use the written contexts it uses the material from the past, which does not have a written statement (Renfrew and Bahn 2016, p.13). Therefore, the gathering of the evidence, …show more content…
The methods for analysis in archaeology, science would definitely be one of the ways for the collaboration to obtain the relationship. Sciences can bring a more certain conclusion and the answer to the past (Hunt et al 2001). However, sciences in archaeology are not only able to provide analytical data for the interpretation, but also providing information for the planning before the excavation. When looking back to the archaeology history, the implication of sciences in archaeology is independent in its application format, although sciences are definitely integrated with archaeology in the archaeology theory – processual archaeology. When looks at nowadays archaeology, sciences have been used in many different disciplines, such as in pre-excavation and post-excavation …show more content…
However, the entire process for the analysis in the archaeology from my perspective might not be a completely subjective processes. The reasons that I think sciences in archaeology might not be completely objective is there are large number of decisions that need to be made before or during the scientific assessment is used. Even the results are obtained, the researchers, who analysis it, would be able to have an influence on the interpretation. For example, for the analysis of the stable isotopes, the researchers have to decide which isotopes that they would use, and sometimes assumptions have to be made in order to carry out the experiment, such as in Montgomery et al. (2016, p.4), the report clearly stated that the method that mentioned in the analysis of strontium and oxygen isotopes for this report is based on the assumption that people were eating and drinking products which were sourced locally. This can show that the use of science is not completely objective, as some of the information for the analysis is no longer available, so the assumption according to some other sources would be made, which makes the process become more
The second question frequently asked regarding Schliemann’s legacy examines his motives and skill as an excavator: was Heinrich Schliemann a good archaeologist? This question has two sides. First, did Schliemann use the best techniques and technology available to him at time of his first excavation? Second, did he have the same values that other archaeologists have?
To identify the specific type, functions and time period of the artifacts, various archaeology books, reports, and journal were referred. The interpretation was then conducted by dividing the artifacts into different area on the map and investigating their relationships.
Archaeology is a continuously evolving field where there is a constant stream of new branches and excavation methods. Due to the influx of new technologies and innovations in recent decades, archaeologists have been able to excavate previously inaccessible areas. For example, new diving equipment and tools such as proton magnetometers, side-scan sonar, sub-bottom profiler, and miniature submarines have allowed archaeologists to dive into the deep depths of the ocean. As a result, the branch of underwater archaeology was created to search for shipwrecks and other artifacts on the ocean floor. Underwater archaeology’s role has increased in recent years as it allows archaeologists to more accurately interpret the past by supplementing information gained through traditional land excavations.
...ncyclopedia of Archaeology, Ed. Deborah M. Pearsall. Vol. 3. Oxford, United Kingdom: Academic Press, 2008. p1896-1905. New Britain: Elsevier, Inc.
Anthropology is a study of mankind that goes beyond the fragment of ones skeletal remains. Anthropology Studies involved within this science include the culture and surroundings a person once lived in.Anthropology, (2014) A example scientist often conduct archaeological digs. Their findings reveal many different aspects of that person or person’s life. The weather a person could have been exposed to. The environment or activities that person might have participated in. The scope of life that can be recovered from human remains is astonishing. Forensic Science as a whole is an impressive and interesting science that can be used within many different realms.
Bridging the gap between past and present and bestowing archaeological record in more coherent, and systematically was provided by Binford in the 1970. He is regarded as the prominent processual archaeologist and envisioned ethnoarchaeology as the rightful methodological heir for elucidating archaeological problems scientifically.
Few Archaeologists have been said to have shaped modern Archaeology. Bruce Trigger was one of those Archaeologists. Before his death in 2006, he published a great number of works that influenced professionals and students alike on an international stage (Fagan 1). His open-minded yet fact-based approach to archaeology changed the way many archaeologists approach their work in the modern era.
Archaeologists are trying very hard to understand the ethnographers. They do this because they want to understand just what it is that they are digging up, and the best way to find out is to ask the people who use them. Of course they are not perfect, and some archaeologists dig competitively (almost like tomb raiders), but overall, we can learn a lot about ancient people from the work of these two groups of scientists working together with the past and the present.
Discussions in the 1970’s and 1980’s within both sides of the debate indicate population change, behavior change and natural processes to be the large determining factors (Attenbrow, 2004). Many archaeologists accepted there was a continuing increase over time in the number of archaeological sites established and used, as well as in the number of artefacts accumulated in individual sites, particularly in the past 5000 years (eg. Johnson 1979:39; Bowdler1981; Morwood 1984:371, 1986, 1987; Ross 1984, 1985:87; Beaton 1985: 16-18; Fletcher-Jones 1985: 282, 286; Lourandos 1985a: 393-411, 1985b: 38; White and Habgood 1985; Hiscock 1986) (Attenbrow, 2004). Population change refers to the changes in number of people or size of the population, behavioural changes referring to changes to activities such as tool manufacturing, subsistence practices as well as the use of space within a site (Attenbrow, 2004). Whilst natural processes include geomorphological and biological process that may have affected the archaeological record (At...
Tensions between science and religion have recurred throughout history. The issues of what to do with the remains of our ancestors are viewed differently by people. Some people believe that the burial site should be left untouched. Among this group of people fall the Native Americans. Archaeologists, on the other hand, think we should uncover the burial site to be able to discover more about the history of the land from which the grave lies.
This week in my science class, Reading and Writing Science, we studied Archeology. Archeology is a field that requires the background information of history and the scientific methods of science. This profession, like most others, is very susceptible to the dangerous of human error. Through my own experience in class after viewing seven, foreign pictures, I have learnt that archeology has to do almost entirely with human observations and perspectives. After a body or an artifact is dug up, it is the job of archeologists to figure out as much as they can about the different objects. Because humans are not omnipotent creatures, sometimes they are wrong in their assumptions and conclusions on the history of these artifacts. After revisiting the pictures and being told the story and professional findings of each one, I too found there were errors in my observations; sometimes I omitted some artifacts and made unknown prejudice or cultural assumptions on the deceased individuals, which in turn caused me to interpret the evidence incorrectly.
As aforementioned, the appearance of pseudoarchaeology may have arisen out of the nationalist dogma of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when archaeology was used to construct national identities and give various groups legitimacy (Dzino 2012 p.180). This can be identified throughout Europe, including the construction of Bosnian identity. At the museum complex at Sarajevo, which opened in 1913, there is no evidence of the 400 years of Ottoman rule over the area. This history was omitted to distance the newly established Austro-Hungarian rule from the Turks (Dzino 2012 p.182). Furthermore, Nazi Germany also adopted archaeology for political gain as well as for ideological gain. In 1941, archaeologist Hans Reinerth and his colleagues went on an expedition to Greece, and claimed to have found new evidence to show that there was Indogermanic migration to Greece during the Neolithic period (Arnold 1990 p.467). This was used to serve as proof of German superiority, as ‘advanced’ civilisation radiated out of the Mediterranean - not Northern Europe (Ibid). These examples aren’t necessarily true of pseudoarchaeology, as they are carried out by experts and contain some semblance of truth. However, the omission and distortion of facts (to pursue a articular purpose) is shared by
Paleoanthropology is a discipline that examines the fossil record in order to gain insight into the development of H. Sapiens through the fossils of hominids and apes. A Paleoanthropologist primarily analysese the morphology of a specimen's body form and dental morphology. Paleoanthropology largely developed as a subspecialization of Paleontology and was eventually incorporated as an anthropological discipline itself. Primatology is the study of non-human primates. A primatologist examines the social behavior and morphology of primates in goals of finding analogous information to better understand human and prehuman developments and actions. Bioarcheology or Biological-archeology is the study of remains in an archeological context. Bioarcheology uses osteological methods to determine features such as age or sex and can be even be used to determine stress or sources of skeletal trauma of remains. Bioarcheology and bioarchaeological methods have had an immense impact on the development of Forensic anthropology and Medical Anthropology. As it deals with determination of the cause of death and identification of remains, it is no surprise that bioarcheology has majorly influenced the forensic anthropological field, however forensic anthropology has more focus on applying legality to the anthropological context than bioarcheology. Medical anthropology is a bit of an
Processual Archaeology, was a movement in the archaeological field that began in the 1960‘s and changed the course of archaeology forever. Anthropologists such as Julian Steward were absolutely influential on many archaeologists and anthropologists during the early 1960s with his theories of cultural ecology which established a scientific way of understanding cultures as human adaption to the surrounding environment (Steward, 1955: 36-38). It was approaches such as Stewards that led eventually led to a rejection of culture-historical approaches to the archaeological record and propelled the ideas of cultural evolution and its reaction with the environment. This approach to cultural systems was essentially a rejection of the culture-historical approach of determinism by suggesting that the environment influences culture but is not a deterministic feature and that both culture and the environment were two separate systems that are dependent on each other for change (Steward, 1955: 36).
Forensics Anthropology is the study that goes beyond the human skeleton. A forensics anthropologist can find out. How a person lived, the food that person ate, and the overall make-up of a human. The use of forensics has grown in recent years, it is used to solve crimes and locate missing persons. Snow, (1982) Forensics anthropology is not a new science. The first case forensics anthropology was used on was the Jezebel case, dating back to the nineteenth century. This case involved a person, who was thrown from a window. Snow, (1982) The remains found in this case were the skull, feet, and the palm of the victim’s hands.