- What was it like to assemble a team of specialists to investigate an archeological site?
- What kinds of challenges did you encounter as you assembled your teams?
- Why would it be difficult for one person to investigate an archeological site?
- Why is investigating one of these sites so expensive?
- How has archeological analysis changed in the past one hundred?
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Assembling an Archeological Team
As a wrap-up to this activity, compose a comment to this post in consideration of the following questions:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The assignment was difficult, yet interesting. However, I think that an actually archeological team would have more than three people in it, with some specializing in more than one area. The hardest thinning the assignment was differentiating between ones such as archeologist and anthropologist was difficult as their job descriptions were so similar. It would be incredibly hard to have a one man excavation squad as no one person is an expert in all of the required areas. Investigating one of these sites would be expensive as you need money for supplies, research, workers, and if its in a foreign country, you would need a visa and plane tickets. Archeology has changed in the past hundred years a lot, as if you found ancient treasure a hundred years ago, people would see it as just that, treasure, made to be sold, bought, and bargained for. If you found it today, it would be used for education, or research.
ReplyDeleteIt was difficult to pick what specialists to investigate a sight because we could only pick 3 people. If this was a real life investigation I would have picked about 4 or 5 specialists because you might find something there that you would not have thought you would find. It would be difficult for only 1 person to investigate a site because that specialist would need more help knowing different things. (for instance, if a paleoanthropologist was investigating a site, and found a clay slate with writing on it, he/she would not be able to read it. A linguist would need to be on the site). Investigating a site is expensive because you have to pay the specialist to come out and investigate a site, this process could take days, months, years, until you find something. The way archeological analysis has changed in the past 100 years is that people now have more tools and different machines (radio carbon dating) to find things out. Also things that are found are very 'precious' worth a lot.
ReplyDeleteI really agree with Amelia i didnt like how we could only pick 3 people to a team, that part to me was really difficult. It would be hard to work on a site with just one person without a full archeological team because you would be trying to accomplish certain things that you wouldn't know about. This would be fairly expensive because you would have to tarvel to the sight, pay for the workers, all the supplies you would need, and many other expenses you would have to pay for. Archeology has come a long way over the past 100 years by all of our supplies have been upgraded we have computers and mor technology to use and like Amelia said "There is radio-carbon dating."
ReplyDeleteIt was sorta fun, yet it was kinda hard. I think it would have been easier if we were able to choose more than 3 for each team just like Amelia & Jake said. It would be hard to work with just one person, because you may not know everything where others speacilize in that area.It would also be easier, because you could hear different opinions on things, and hear what other people have to say about things. It might be expensive because you'd have to pay for the speacilist to come and look at the site, and for all of the supplies, and anything else that you'd have to pay for. Archeology has come a long way over the past 100 years, because we have more technology, and knowledge on things and better understanding. Also like Amelia said their are things like "radio-carbon dating" which is very useful.
ReplyDelete