Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Archaeology is distinct from palaeontology, which is the study of fossil remains. Archaeology is particularly important for learning about prehistoric societies, for which, by definition, there are no written records. Prehistory includes over 99% of the human past, from the Paleolithic until the advent of literacy in societies around the world. [1]
Archaeology is the study of human activity in the past, primarily through the recovery and analysis of the material culture and environmental data that they have left behind, which includes artifacts, architecture, biofacts (also known as eco-facts) and cultural landscapes (the archaeological record).
The different approaches to archaeological evidence which every person brings to his or her interpretation result in different constructs of the past for each individual. The benefit of this approach has been recognised in such fields as visitor interpretation, cultural resource management and ethics in archaeology as well as fieldwork.
The archaeological record is the body of physical (not written) evidence about the past. It is one of the core concepts in archaeology, [1] the academic discipline concerned with documenting and interpreting the archaeological record. [2]
This view of culture would be "entirely satisfactory if the aim of archaeology was solely the definition and description of these entities." [12] However, as the 1960s rolled around and archaeology sought to be more scientific, archaeologists wanted to do more than just describe artifacts, and the archaeological culture found. [2]
A multitude of different theoretical approaches have developed over the last 50 years and exist in parallel across the discipline. These range broadly from an empirical archaeology viewed as a science, to a relativistic post-modern concept of archaeology as an ideology that cannot verify its own concepts.
There are concerns about the impact of microplastics on the environment and on human health, but this latest study also suggests they could force a change in the entire field of archaeology.
Martinón-Torres and Killick distinguish ‘scientific archaeology’ (as an epistemology) from ‘archaeological science’ (the application of specific techniques to archaeological materials). [1] Martinón-Torres and Killick claim that ‘archaeological science’ has promoted the development of high-level theory in archaeology.