Viggen Posted October 5, 2006 Report Share Posted October 5, 2006 Interesting article about becoming an archaeologist... Age 15 - Am I too young to start? to Age 18 - should I go to university? proceeding with Age 21 - a career in archaeology and Age 22 - the circuit getting on with Age 28: am I too late? finishing with Age 50 - Can I still be of use? Conclusion; Archaeology has traditionally always been a career open to the talents; in recent years it has become more formalised, but there are still archaeologists rising to the top from the most surprising backgrounds: Martin Carver, the Professor of Archaeology at York spent the first 12 years of his career as a soldier: but when he came to archaeology, he shot to the top... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DecimusCaesar Posted October 5, 2006 Report Share Posted October 5, 2006 That's a good article...I never studied history or archaeology when I was in University (which I just finished a few months ago). Even If I wanted to go study it , I wouldn't have the money or the time to go on another university course which is a shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil25 Posted October 5, 2006 Report Share Posted October 5, 2006 I am told that most modern archaeologists are not historians, but scientists (chemists, botanists, engineers etc). One recently said, "If I need an historian, I'll buy one in!!" Modern archaeology appears to be all about project management, scientific technique (soil science, pottery types etc), man-management, communication, analysis etc. Times change... What would Sir Mortimer, or Heinrich have thought?? Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaecus Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 I am told that most modern archaeologists are not historians, but scientists (chemists, botanists, engineers etc). No, these are scientists that help archaeologists; actually, archaeologists are historians, but whereas the latter spend their time with documents, the former also five attention to the material world. Modern archaeology appears to be all about project management, scientific technique (soil science, pottery types etc), man-management, communication, analysis etc. Times change... What would Sir Mortimer, or Heinrich have thought?? Unfortunatelly, you're right about archaeology today: it has mostly became a dull and routine work. The earlier generations would certainly be disapointed with this shift from learning about the past through the material world to a mere record of findings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.