Archaeologists and Anthropologists
by Rit NosotroComparative Essay
Compare the roles of Archaeologists and Anthropologists.
|
 |
Summary:
Many people use the words “Archaeology” and “Anthropology” interchangeably when speaking about the finding and studying of artifacts. While both field of science have much practical overlap, they are not exactly the same. They both use some of the same processes and methods, but when analyzing data and artifacts, the goals of archaeology and anthropology are slightly different.
From Webster’s dictionary, the definition of archaeology is “the scientific study of material remains (as fossil relics, artifacts, and monuments) of past human life and activities”, while anthropology is “the science of human beings; especially : the study of human beings in relation to distribution, origin, classification, and relationship of races, physical character, environmental and social relations, and culture”. (Merriam-Webster) According to these definitions, the fields of study are quite similar; an Archaeologist’s job is to dig up remains and analyze them, while the Anthropologist tries to further understand the cultural applications of certain people groups and not just the physical forms, based on the archaeologist’s findings. Both professions generally require a Ph.D. Basically, an archaeologist’s work is incorporated in the broader spectrum of anthropology and each branch of study works closely with the other.
Both fields of study utilize the method of carbon-14 dating, which involves analyzing the amounts of carbon-14 left in an object that was once living and thus computing an approximate age based on the half-life of carbon-14. However, without taking into account occurrences such as The Flood, the changing strength of the earth’s magnetic field, the elimination of fossil fuels by burning, or the use of atomic bombs, the dates become misconstrued and often are off by millions of years. When such events are taken into account, however, carbon-14 dating can be very useful for both archaeologists and anthropologists in examining fossilized organisms. For instance, fossilized animals, plants, and people can all be aligned in such a way to see which things were alive at the same time, and thus what part of a culture was like. The trouble with carbon-14 dating is that it has been proven incorrect on many occasions, even when extenuating circumstances are taken into account. (Ham) Still, carbon-14 dating is an accepted method of dating objects, and if archaeologists and anthropologists receive given ages with a discerning ear, it is very possible for them to distinguish between realistic dates and impossibilities, such as any calculations of millions of years, and align such dates to a more accurate, Biblical viewpoint.
Once reasonable ages are established by carbon-14 dating or another method, archaeologists and anthropologists do different things with the raw information. For instance, archaeologists are concerned with the discovering of, dating, and restoring of artifacts to see what past tools and other articles were like; they might compile tools, pots, and furniture to hypothesize what a furnished house might have looked like on the inside. Archaeologists might also try and put together a few dinosaur bones and scientifically approximate how tall a particular dinosaur was or how old it was when it died. On the other hand, anthropologists tend to go deeper to hypothesize how whole people groups behaved, according to their clothes, tools, jewelry etc.… From the same tools, pots, furniture, and houses, they might rather discover how the people coped with the weather based on the house structure or how the people group wove the fabric of the clothing and the clothing’s significance in a particular culture. With the dinosaur bones, anthropologists may be interested to know the diet and size of the dinosaur as well as it’s relationship to other dinosaurs in general: how many lived together, how they lived as a group etc… Obviously there are similarities in the fields of archaeology and anthropology and yet their overall goals in interpreting information remain different.
The role of a Christian archaeologist or anthropologist is major; such scientists have proved to many people the validity of Biblical sites and occurrences. Through the excavation of Biblical sites and interpretation of the gathered evidence, scientists have been able to confirm that certain Biblical people existed and that did indeed live and build where it is written in Scripture. In fact, evidence exists to prove the existence of such people groups as the Hittites as well as cities such as Jericho. (Zukeran) The abilities that archeologists and anthropologists hold to further the development of Biblical evidence is extremely important; in a world caught up in false religions and theories, the interpretation of excavation sites is crucial. Working together, archaeologists and anthropologists could very well disprove and correct myths about Biblical times.
Another small difference between the two is which societies that each study. Archaeologists are only involved with ancient and primitive societies, while anthropologists are branching out to study these as well as modern societies. By collecting and analyzing modern trends and data, anthropologists can generalize many aspects of mankind, in the past or in the present. (New Standard Encylopedia)
In conclusion, archaeology and anthropology, though different studies, are very much interwoven; each helps the other tremendously in the study and interpretation of information. One could think of anthropology as an entire sphere and archaeology making up only a small part of that sphere, though not in any way insignificant.
Questions
1. What is the main difference between archaeology and anthropology?
a. Archaeologists study arches, while Anthropologists study insects.
b. There is no difference, they just couldn’t agree on a name for themselves
c. Archaeologists consider Biblical evidence, while anthropologists don’t.
d. Archaeology is more specialized branch within Anthropology
e. Only Archaeology uses carbon-14 dating
2. Which factors can skew the results of carbon-14 dating?
a. the use of atomic bombs
b. the changes in the earth’s magnetic field
c. what a specimen ate the day it died
d. fossil fuels being burned
e. a,b,d only
3. How can Christian archaeologists and anthropologists support Christianity?
a. by finding and publishing the truth of Biblical events and people
b. by burying evangelical tracts as testimony to future diggers.
c. by putting money that was found in digs into church offering plates.
d. by wearing shirts that say “I dig for the Creator”
e. by plageraizing secular colleges who interpret everything given the assumption
of macro evolution.
4. What might an archaeologists study?
a. fossilized plants
b. owl pellets
c. road kill
d. ant mound contents
e. fingernail grime of dumpster divers
answers:
1) d
2) e
3) a
4) a
Bibliography
Ham, Ken, et al. “How accurate is Carbon-14 dating?” Christian
Answers.
Christian Answers.Net. 25 Sept. 2003 <http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c007.html>.
Merriam-Webster OnLine. 2002. Merriam-Webster. 25 Sept. 2003 <http://www.m-w.com/home.htm>.
New Standard Encylopedia. J. G. Ferguson Publishing Company, 1992.
Zukeran, Pat. “Archaeology and the Old Testament.” Probe. 2000.
Probe Ministries.
25 Sept. 2003 <http://www.probe.org/docs/arch-ot.html>.
Additional information about <http://hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/comp/cw02archanthro.htm>
Map Graph Focus on Facts Biography
Disclaimer:
The above essay was donated to hyperhistory.net.
Kindly inform
of inaccuracies or plagiarism.
Post a link to this essay,
<a href="
">
a great essay
</a>
on your blog or website :
| Comparative Essays | Biographies | Doc. Based Questions | Change Over Time |
 |
 |
 |
 |