In some ways, we are like everyone else. We have feelings, likes, dislikes, and even pet peeves. There are times when people do what they think is a constructive post on a field of research they know nothing about.
Don’t worry, we get the same attitude from professional archaeologists even though we have studied and researched this field for over 25 years now. Our problem is that we come from a biblical perspective that looks for the truth not the best explanation or theory.
That explains the tone and nature of many of our articles. At least we have degrees in archaeology and have sat through countless lectures, read countless books and papers on the field and their discoveries, etc.
Most people just want to feel part of something so they think they can write about the field and think they are contributing something important. It doesn’t always work that way. The results come out as the following quote examples show:
This prompt has the unique quality of having been chosen by my wife! Before I can dig up (heh) my thoughts on archaeology, we need to define it. (MM website)
Amateurs often think that no one knows the definition of whatever topic they are writing about. So they feel that they have to cover or rehash old ground and while new to them, it is old news to most people interested in this field of research.
This often shows their lack of knowledge of the field and those who spend studying archaeology as a hobby or field of interest.
Archaeology is the study of human activity through the recovery and analysis of material culture. It can involve examining human remains, ancient architecture, historical weapons, old writings, and much more. There are various different mechanisms through which archaeological artifacts might be uncovered and examined. (Ibid)
Well, that is partly correct. According to the Cambridge Dictionary archaeology is defined as:
the study of the buildings, graves, tools, and other objects that belonged to people who lived in the past, in order to learn about their culture and society (source)
Then according to the Webster-Mirriam Dictionary, the etymology of the term archaeology is:
French archéologie, from Late Latin archaeologia antiquarian lore, from Greek archaiologia, from archaio- + -logia -logy (source)
Then, Dictionary.com tells everyone the Greek meaning of the term and when it was first used in modern times:
First recorded in 1600–10, archaeology is from the Greek word archaiología the discussion of antiquities (source)
Then while there are different tools used by archaeologists to find their discoveries and create their theories, there technically is only one method of operation. Since these artifacts are not found on the surface, except for some rare occasions, archaeologists have to dig.
Excavation is the main method for finding ancient civilizations’ remains. Sometimes those excavations can go between 50 and 100 feet deep. Dr. Woolley did that deep and claimed he found the flood layer.
The quote from the MM website above presents misleading information and gives readers a false idea of what archaeology is about.
What might we leave behind for future archaeologists to dig up? Given the increasingly digital nature of our world, will future archaeologists turn to digital means of discovery? (MM website)
Unfortunately, not that much. One thing is for sure, they will probably not find any artifacts relating to us or our lives. We are not that important and there are other people with more material items that may survive the test of time.
It is more by luck than anything else that artifacts, foundations, wells, and grave sites will survive erosion, corruption, natural disasters, wars, and other issues that stop archaeologists from finding more information from the past.
With the advent of nuclear bombs, our modern culture may not leave any material remains for future archaeologists to discover. it is nice to wonder but you need to factor in reality and the whole picture before coming to a proper view of what will remain in the future centuries.
One conceivable difference between historical archaeology and any future practice of the field is that preservation of our society might be somewhat easier than it was in the past.
For starters, historically we know a lot more about the lives of the wealthy, ruling classes of say, the Romans, than we do of ordinary Romans.
The rulers had the means to produce statues and temples, which were considered of cultural significance. Thus, a great deal of care went into maintaining them, hence why they survive today. (Ibid)
This is why amateurs should learn something first before writing about a field of research they know little to nothing about. There are a great many books out there detailing the daily lives of regular citizens of different cultures including the Roman era.
While it would be nice to say we know a lot about all classes of ancient society, those books only detail what the archaeologist thinks their discoveries describe. You will find a lot of disagreement between archaeologists on what the same discovery is saying about the past.
There are many examples of this statement and our best is when Israel Finkelstein contradicted the late Eilat Mazar on one of her discoveries. he even wrote a paper for a Tel Aviv University publication detailing his observations and where they disagreed with Ms. Mazar’s conclusions.
What we know about the past is often caught up in differing opinions and we may not know what we think we know. The buildings remain because they were built well not because the elite took care of them.
A great example of this Akrotiri on the island of Santorini. That city was not preserved because the elites maintained it. The city was preserved because a volcano erupted and buried it.
Besides, the elites would not do the maintenance of anything. They had slaves and workers to do the work for them. This is again why some people need to do some studying before commenting.
They just produce erroneous information and unwary readers of their work get the wrong idea and no facts. The reason for the Roman Colosseum, aqueducts, roads, etc., lasted was not because of superior maintenance on the part of the upper classes.
It was because the Romans knew how to use top-quality ingredients to create top-quality construction materials. Plus the fact that subsequent residents of the area highly valued those ancient structures and worked to preserve them.
That preservation work may have been done like it is today- donations made by the regular citizens and not the wealthy.
What might our legacy be?
If the world gets to survive a few more thousand years our legacy is probably not going to be that good. if there are remains to be uncovered, it may show how sinful our world became as well as how depraved so many people were.
That is not a good legacy. No matter what legacy remains, it will be like the current archaeological discoveries. it will be bits and pieces with future archaeologists reading into discoveries their own thoughts and ideas about our era.
It won’t be what really took place and that is because archaeology only deals with fragments of the past. It is a field that can only discover, if they dig in the right place, what has survived all the dangers that material cultures must face over thousands of years.
That is one of the key elements of archaeology and its failure to know more accurately what took place in the past. There are many times archaeologists have excavated in the wrong area and come up with the wrong conclusion as they did not find what they were hoping to find.
This happened when Dr. Garstang asked his student, Kathleen Kenyon to reopen excavations at Jericho. She did not find what she wanted to find thus contradicting the conclusions of her professor and influencing a generation or more of archaeologists to accept her idea that Jericho was not occupied during the time the Bible said it was.
Dr. Bryant Wood has eloquently corrected Kathleen Kenyon’s conclusion and brought the truth to light. You can read one of his papers at this link. He has other papers on this topic on the Associates of Biblical Research website, as do other researchers for that organization.
A legacy is as subjective as history is. It is in the eyes of those doing the analysis of the discoveries. You may not get to the truth right away either as you need to know the archaeologists’ beliefs before assessing their information to see if it is true or not.
This is another reason why amateurs should not write on this field of research as they do not know how to identify the proper tone of the archaeological information presented to the public.
There is so much that they do not know or how it applies in this field.
——————————–
The main quotes came from the MM website and we are sure we will hear a negative rant in response to this article. But it is a good example of why people who do not know anything about the field should not take suggestions from people who do not know anything about the field.
The end result, sadly like so many archaeologists do as well, is to present the wrong information about archaeology and the past. many people do not like how we write about this field either but we come from a biblical viewpoint and analyze the conclusions, theories etc., from the point of finding the truth.
The Bible says ye shall know the truth and this statement applies to archaeology and all areas of life including the rest of the scientific fields. Unfortunately, unbelievers ignore or avoid the truth as much as possible and the world gets misinformation all the time.
theoarch 