Archaeologist here. Ask me anything except will I examine your bone

Archaeologist here. Ask me anything except will I examine your bone.

Have you planted anything fake in the ground for future archaeologist's to find?

How much do you know about ceremonial/decorative flint tools? Would this be something that arose after the specialization of labor?

T. Mayan collection from US library of Congress

Will you examine my penis?

No, because chances are slim archaeology as it is will exist that far in the future. We'll either continue this society making extremely accurate records in the forms of various media or we'll perish to the point of losing currently obtained records. When you think about the society as a whole, its end would also mean end of all data from those irreversibly ruined sites (by excavation) without chance they will be uncovered in the far far future. Whatever we do now, we carry it in the future forever.

And as for future forms of "archaeology", its enough to wait couple of decades for its proto-forms, when people actually start searching the deep internet, archives, records, audio tapes and so on for things like 9/11, ISIS, various databases, getting permissions to access some old as fuck servers and putting all that info into some coherent unbiased evidence. Who knows what sort of political changes we can experience in the future and how will that affect history, which is now recorded differently. And under properly malevolent regimes, 2-3 generations forget things easily.

I know nothing Mesoamerican cultures, I might as well be excavating on Mars. I work in Europe and my focus was on Roman provincial. I went through mandatory courses in lithic analysis, but they enabled me to recognize the tools of various "human" races, roughly period they were made in and levels of intelligence necessary to make them. Also their use, obviously. But I don't think I'm very good at it, it's been a while. I just don't see myself working that or needed it any time soon, except I decide to work abroad.

Ah! How different did rural gauls live to the rural franks that lived under Charlemagne and beyond?

Just got back from visiting Vindolanda a couple of weeks ago. Incredible.

>No, because chances are slim archaeology as it is will exist that far in the future. We'll either continue this society making extremely accurate records in the forms of various media or we'll perish to the point of losing currently obtained records. When you think about the society as a whole, its end would also mean end of all data from those irreversibly ruined sites (by excavation) without chance they will be uncovered in the far far future. Whatever we do now, we carry it in the future forever.
>And as for future forms of "archaeology", its enough to wait couple of decades for its proto-forms, when people actually start searching the deep internet, archives, records, audio tapes and so on for things like 9/11, ISIS, various databases, getting permissions to access some old as fuck servers and putting all that info into some coherent unbiased evidence. Who knows what sort of political changes we can experience in the future and how will that affect history, which is now recorded differently. And under properly malevolent regimes, 2-3 generations forget

Whoa, it was a joke. Are you salty about picking an obsolete profession?

Even 58-51 BC when Caesar meddled in their affairs, some Gauls lived differently and were changing because of trade with the Romans. Some resisted that trade fiercly because they knew it was changing their lives, making them weaker compared to Rome or so they thought. Tribe Nervii resisted Caesar's attempts to include them in their trade so fiercly they were rather nearly exterminated. Only like 50 years later they were far more included in the Roman world, going as far as getting accustomed to their rule, trading regularly, enlisting in the army etc. I think Augustus had some Gauls as bodyguards even. And 200-300 years after, still long before Franks, Gauls became Roman citizens who spoke Latin and actually produced Roman goods and were Roman in most ways. Idk if that answers your question. But "Gauls" after Charlemagne? I wouldn't know about it desu.

How accurate is HBO's production of Rome in terms of material culture?

Yeah. Most Roman castri on Donau/Danube are based, some still uncertain/unexcavated. I wish I could visit some of those on Rhein. especially Xanten which is the most preserved by far.

Did latin inherit soma Gaulish words?
Also, how far away where the latin and gaul languages, where they cousins like english and dutch or more separate?

I don't know why do you think I was salty kek. I knew it was a joke, didn't stop me from thinking and writing about it. I've been asked this before. And seriously, I wasn't even rude or sounded salty.
I remember thinking at one point that it was the most accurate Rome on TV I've seen with few unimportant things being 30 years off and those things are related to the city itself, not indoors items such as furniture and other items. Obviously, they didn't put some building on Forum before it actually existed or some such thing. but there was something, I forgot. They managed to portray Rome very well in my opinion, but sometimes they were too modest. Sometimes that modesty was good, like that scene when they cross Tiber and Vorenus almost casually notes how that means they're traitors now. Sometimes it was too modest. Like, I get Rome was filthy at some places and even temples of plebs deities, but Rome sometimes looked like straight out Indian shithole and temples like some unholy places in the back alleys looked like some strange oriental cult and not official state religion. I don't know for a fact if that was really like that, but from what I've read, I imagine not. Or at least it wasn't so carelessly let to rot.

Thanks based user. In a romaboo so do you mind if I just shoot the shit with you? I'm interning before grad school and I want to make sure I want to go into Roman antiquities. What's your favorite province? Favorite people? Favorite unlikely interaction (i know it's byzzie but I find varangians fighting in Iran pretty awesome)? Know anything about Rome's relations with China? I know China wrote a lot about Rome and had unimaginably kind things to say about them (regarding them as an equal to china, which they have never done of any state before or since).

Those are similar languages, perhaps even more than French or English today. Both are Indo-European, with Gauls being Celts with a different name.

Have you ever found anything cool?

>I don't know why do you think I was salty kek
You typed out 200 words to answer a question which was answered with the first.

I'm going to be at a dig for a little while as part of a class next fall. What should I expect/prepare? Also, how different is archaeology between periods (I'm a medieval studies major in the States; would trying to get involved with colonial studies here be worth it or just stick to classroom stuff for medieval)?

The matter of Rome's relations with China is yet to be explored. Our knowledge of those interractions or knowledge they've had about each others is so scarce that those few facts are repeated over and over perhaps since archaeology even became a thing. Knowledge and resources are there, 'all' that it takes is a fluent speaker of both Chinese and at the very least English, basic Latin and German/Italian or a team of people with access to Chinese resources. When you think about it, it's not even so extraordinary that this wasn't done before. Archaeologists and historians are few as it is and especially international ones who would even be interested in doing that humongous work. Not to mention China is for some reason still sensitive about their history and what question could such things raise, so I don't even know how they treat Westerners who would like to research that topic in particular. I remember reading some student's work who was Chinese. The work was in English and basically everything that was listed in it were references upon references on some untranslated works and dots never connected because of numerous reasons, one of those also being Chinese archaeologists simply disregarding or not knowing material that could be perhaps Roman or Roman-influenced. Same with prehistoric cultures in Europe.

But as we already know, Chinese did know about Rome and some Chinese visited it and described it from their point of view and it was hinted interactions existed. And that Crassus' legion, for all we know maybe ended up in China, but that is currently a laughable matter to discuss seriously.

>favorite province
I'm not sure. Either Hispania or Germania.
>favorite people
Probably some of those Illyrian tribes, but Idk.

Yes, very cool things. I've found a brick with the rare signature of one particular Roman legion that shouldn't have been present in that area. (that maybe means they have been and that they've build the road it was found on)
On a prehistorical site dating 5000 BC I've found a sacrifical altar on the ground of some house-cottage. Despite that ridiculously old date, we could still see the traces of arch in the ground made by the movement of the doors that once stood there.

What was grad school like for Archaeology?

Archaeology between periods isn't much different in terms of methodology and excavation process itself. Obviously, material is different and the way the leader goes about excavating it and using knowledge, but for the students it should be almost the same. I believe you could study medieval European archaeology while learning methodology on colonial settlements. Once you arrive on medieval site, you will use your knowledge of material/info/etc from literature. Besides, I think you're supposed to be able to excavate anything anyway and are expected to.

None of this applies to excavations of paleolithic sites and pre-human races which is usually caves, that is so different I don't know anything about it. I literally have 0 knowledge of it, I've only seen it once. They have some miniature units and are divded a person per square meter and use weird equipment.

What country are you from?

How much do you know about Roman toilets?

Bunch of weird kids who can afford to study that shit, stoners and elitist professors with vast knowledge of irrelevant details who don't do actual archaeology in most cases, but build their careers in the university. Most of them just wait to retire and are comfy teaching.

Lmfao. Some.

Tell me everything

I don't even know enough to tell you anything that you couldn't search on Google. It's not some complicated matter.
But here is some interesting detail. Working on the Roman sewage (cloaca maxima) system was such a hard work that people commited suicides daily just to avoid working on it.

how depressing is the employment situation?

What civilization is the most underrepresented in the archaeological record?
That is, what great civilization left less record that expected?

Depends where. I've been lucky, but I'd be a bad person to recommend anyone to study archaeology.
I don't know much about civilizations outside of Europe and Mid East. But in those areas, I don't think there is such thing.

Happy to see a fellow archaeologist! I wish you luck and great finds!

why do you still believe the satans lies and why are you propagating evil sin against god like evolution?

Because I'm inherently evil and I was born malevolent. that's why I decided to study arch.
Same, same. :) Thanks

Where you at famalam fellow archaeologist here.

Why have there never been
archaeological expeditions in the caucasus?

Islamists galore who'd behead and ransom you.

Glad to see this many archaeologists here on Veeky Forums, what do you guys study?
I've just started my masters, currently working on pre-columbian landscapes and gis

Still in undergrad but starting my dissertation.

>Only like 50 years later
That was quick? It's like modern era assimilation.

Romans were better at assimilating than any other culture, they didnt try to remove anything from conquered peoples culture unless they found it immoral

Peoples perception of that is biased because they werent so kind to the monothiests, due to them refusing to pay customary lip service to worshipping the emperor
Hell many native Romans worshipped foreign gods in the mystery cults

is it a thing to have sex with cute archeologist girls in the living van thats dragged out to the site or it was just me being lucky born in this god awful country?

i was a digger for many many years

Depends, what site?

My daughter wants to be an archaeologist is it true in order to make a living from it you need to have a lot of money to begin with to fund your own digs?

Is it a good career choice? What is the pay? What is the job market for that skill set?

It can be good, the money isn't great but livable and when you move up in the private sector it gets better. As for funding a dig yes you need a lot of money. The last one I went on was funded by Ralph Fiennes (voldemort, his bro used to run it) and the Duke of Westminster and it was still horribly underfunded. That's also included paying to go. If you can get funding it's good but normally it's needs to be a special site.

As for job availability like any it depends how the economy is doing.

Im finally making enough money in my career as an electrician to be able to afford college and not be homeless. Do you have to go to school to get involved with the excavations? Do you guys take your own contractors around with you to set your sites up or just hire locals? I've always wanted to travel to remote places and find cool shit. Can knowing a trade get you in or do you need to be a scholar?

why are you guys equipped with whips

don't leave a real job to go back to school. college degrees have never been less scarce. if you can make a good living without one, then fuck it.

Pay isn't that bad considering. But it's a buck earned with hard work, constant travelling and even physically demanding work. Of course there are various jobs you could work besides digging, but for that pay (and even bigger) you could just work in the office in some city and have actual life. So, archaeology is really for those into it.

Not OP, but the Galatian people is a very "unlikely interaction".
They are Gauls who ended up in the middle of Turkey in the IIIrd century. They created a strong kingdom that lasted until the end of the roman civil wars.
They were depicted as very pale and it seems they were fighting naked, at least the front lines, just as in Gaul.

How many papers did you write ?
Just to know if I have a chance to have read you.

Hey OP, could you help a fellow historian ?
I am looking for a specific book, but my university does not have it, and it is not on libgen.
Do you have a way to get this ?
SCHALLES H.-J., Die frühkaiserzeitliche Manuballista aus Xanten-Wardt, Band 18 der Reihe Xantener Berichte , Mains, 2010.

The brick with the signature of the disappeared legion that was supposed to have been wiped out in Scotland in the early 300s?

>and levels of intelligence necessary to make them
Are you stupid?