I'm a working archaeologist in North America (The Pacific Northwest & Great Basin...Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Utah & Nevada primarily). Some basic facts about actually doing it for a living: 1. Most of the paying work is to satisfy legal requirements. We very rarely excavate. Mostly it's "survey". If some kind of engineering project (like a new power line or road) is being built, we have to go in there and walk around the project area and see what's there. Sometimes you might dig small hole just to test, but formal excavation is very rare. 2. There's prehistoric stuff all over the place just laying on the ground. Once you train your eyes on what to look for, it's all over the place. 3. We have to count rusty cans. The regulations are written so that anything that's 50 years or older qualifies as potentially historically significant. In the areas I work in, this means I spend a lot of time counting rusty cans from old camps. They don't tell you about this in school. 4. The pay sucks, and employment is sporadic. In any other field with my level of education (masters) and experience, I'd make double what I do now. 5. It's a really small community. You're never more than 2 degrees removed from any other archaeologist you meet. This makes for a lot of gossip and drama. This is another thing they don't tell you in school. 6. It's a lot of fun! You get to go hiking and camping with your friends and they pay you for it! Granted, it's not much money, but my job is to literally go into the wilderness with like-minded weirdos and hike around and look for stuff. After a day of hiking and looking, it's time for libations at a dive bar in whatever tiny one-horse hick town we're staying in. Yes, I could make more in some other profession, but doing archaeology is good for you. Marching around outdoors miles and miles away from civilization is good for you physically and psychologically. It's healthy, overall it's a helluva good time, and even the miserable times make for decent stories later. I've been stranded overnight, shot at, lost, almost struck by lightning, etc. etc., and wouldn't exchange any of it for being chained to a computer under fluorescent lights. My recommendation: Try it, but keep your options open. Go to Archaeological Field School, and then get a paid job for the summer field season while you're not in school. Do this for a couple summers and see if you like it. If you do like it, get a master's ASAP. If not, you're not out anything, and I promise at the very least you'll have some interesting memories.
Thank you. I'm an aspiring archaeologist and I've been trying to get the "real" scoop on how the work really is and your comment has helped me a lot. I honestly think I'm still gonna do it...might even do a little treasure hunting while at it.
May I ask where you studied and what degree you have? I am starting school this fall and I’m studying anthropology I am really interested in archaeology specifically!
The main problem with Archaeology: you don't actually fight Nazis or find magical artifacts and people still treat you like a douche for wearing a fedora.
Completely untrue. We have a module at the end of each year on fighting Nazis, Although they're thinking of changing the class to focus more on ISIS next year. Traditionally it focuses on skills with throwing trowels, revolvers, and cardiovascular endurance, but some more modern universities teach dual pistols and acrobatics. And the type of fedora really determines how people regard you. A thinner brim increases likelihood of ridicule, while wider brims when coupled with a bullwhip and trowel multiply how much archaeology you have. The materials are also important in the hat. Other hats such as the classic Tweed Bucket hat as sported by the true and accurate historical figure, Henry Jones Senior are also a good source of archaeology.
I swear if I ever make a game I will have a legendary sword with the ability to screw off the pommel after about half a year of channeling time and instakill an enemy. Oh and of course the Narrator would shout END THEM RIGHTLY! when you do it. Or the party members if there's no narrator.
Archeology translator: Archeologist: This a religious ceremonial item! Translation: We have no records about this item, and absolutely no clue what this is.
Eh. That is not always the case here in North America. It goes more like this: Archeologist: This a religious ceremonial item! Native American: No, that's a piece of cookware.
Thank you. I am a high school teacher. Although my students don't talk about being archeologists, your comments on practical career considerations is useful and topical. I can see myself using this in the classroom.
As a person doing a Ph.D. in Prehistoric Archeology I think this video is absolutely mandatory for everyone thinking of jumping the bandwagon of this area of knowledge. Sadly, Archeology is not about "knowing how the people lived", but about "how to know how the people lived". It requires technique and method, and almost never intuition, nor imagination. It's 50% slow-paced excavation, 50% staring at long Access databases/AutoCAD designs/typology catalogues. It's a method, not a science (or that's what most of the good profesional arcaheologists would tell you about their work, but I don't deny there's a lot of archaeologists that see themselves as "scientifics", lol) Still, it has a lot of fascinating things if you are up to take the "hard tour". It is not a bad thing if you decline Archaeology in favor of more "flavoured" fields of historical and social enquiry like Sociology, History or even Philology: there will always be things you like more and do you better than others, and all this fields of enquiry are equally important to the knowledge of our past (everything is better than reading a Tsoukalos book and start pointing at UFOs at every monumental site and deny any other explanation). So, as an arcaheologist, I'm totally with this video: Arcaheology isn't for everyone, but there are more options you can think of if the past times amaze you.
He IS an archaeologist since he has to be an archaeologist to be doing a Ph.D. in Prehistoric Archaeology. I don't know how the procedure is in Dudeland though.
I must say, it has been a childhood dream of mine becoming an archaeologist and for the same reasons as you Skall, I wanted to know how ancient cultures lived. And honestly, the more you talked the more I was being fascinated, you revealed so much new stuff that I wasn't even aware was part of archaeology and it made it all the more exciting. I live in Israel and I have visited a few archaeological sites to the north and south, but what I want the most is to travel across Europe and see some of ruines that inspired the greatest minds in history
I wanted to study archaeology since I was 11 years old, I ended up going to Boston University and graduating with my BA in archaeology in 2015. I can relate to most of what you've said here (except that I find pottery sherds and serialization interesting). Many of my professors (not to mention my parents) said the exact same thing - you won't find a job. It's hard when the folks you look up to in the field tell you not to bother. I was lucky enough to have excavation be a requirement for my degree, and got to dig at a Maya site in Guatemala. Since graduating, I've taken a job in software sales to pay the bills. I'm not sure if I'll go back to school to pursue archaeology or go in another direction. I will never regret studying archaeology, it is an absolutely fascinating field and there is much work to be done in the world by archaeologists. Thanks for making an honest video about the reality of it. If you want to study something and pursue a career in it, don't let anyone stand in your way, but it also helps to have realistic expectations and an open mind
I study archaeology too - in central Europe btw, and our teachers told us the same thing at the beginning. It was harsh, but hey, challenge accepted! :)
I'm currently in my second year of a B.A. in Archaeology, and have to agree with you on the subject of looking at pot sherds. Last semester I spent around 40 hours in my University's museum counting the size, shape, and number of grains of sand in the profile of broken pots. However I was lucky enough to get to go to Jordan on a dig for about a month in the summer following my Freshman year and it was really that experience that really convinced me that this was the right fit, and all the grunt work was worth it. I'll be going to the same site again next year, and while not every school offers opportunities like this, I personally wouldn't recommend giving up on a discipline without trying out the fun parts first.
As a working archaeologist in the UK I thought this was quite good. I've never had to memorize much for pottery beyond the basic identification of if it's diagnostic and sometimes a rough period but perhaps it's different where you studied. And yeah the career does require a decent amount of travel, things seem to be picking up here in terms of the availability of jobs though, there is a huge surge in infrastructure projects and the archaeology companies can't find as much staff as they need currently so they're all desperate for people, which is slowly driving up wages. Doesn't mean you'll ever be able to buy a porsche or fly first class though. Does mean everyone thinks your job is really cool!
Hello! I would really like to study archeology. I really like history and i watched many documentairies and i read a lot about it. I am only concerned about the fact that my math and chemistry are not good. Is this really a problem? Because i really have interest and passion for history.
@@Arthur-gs2jr I currently am looking towards taking archaeology in the near future (university) too. I take chemistry as a subject and to be quite honest, if you don't already have basic knowledge of processes of chemistry then this may be a difficult subject to endorse from ground 0. In saying this, if you are passionate to do what it takes to learn chemistry then don't be afraid to do so. I do believe chemistry is only needed to an extent. Like anything, having the prior education will allow for further understanding between what you may be studying. Goodluck!
Thank you so much for this honest and detailed account of studying Archeology...One can tell it's causing you much more pain and frustration than pleasure, and since job opportunitities are scarce, you porbably made the best decision to leave it behind. I like history and the scientific part wouldn't scare me off as much because there is a laboratory aspect to it apparently (dating schards and studying patterns) which is still something that wouldn't bother me. Again, depends on how your thinking processes feel most comfortable and what your true passion is.
I think 'reasons you _should_ consider being a ... from someone who decided not to be'... should be a thing. Gave a lot of insight into how to temper your expectations, and approach a field of study from a grounded perspective.
Hi Skall! I'm quite glad that yu made a video about this (being an archaeology student) and hearing your experiences on it, I can recognise some stuff (even if I'm only in my first year) still I think what you're saying is quite good and accurate and I'm glad you're saying that people should do what they love and what they are passionate about. I can gladly say that where I'm from, the job market is quite big (for now) we're drowning in work because of new regulations saying that when people have the intention to build something on a plot of land, they need to have an archaeological study whether or not ther eis archaeological interest. Like you said it does differ from country to country and I am ery lucky to be in mine because of several reasons. We do have the technological stuff but we also have practical classes in our second semester. In shorter terms: I liked your video.
Hey Ludi Lombardi! I am very interested in archaeology too and I would love to study it at uni next year!Where are you from,or better yet,what is this country "archaeology-friendly" you're talking bout? And another curiosity: in this digs you've written about (think they're called rescue archaeology) do the architets/building bosses tell you like "you've got 6 months and after that we are going to build the building"?Becouse I know "normal" digs last years and years,so I assume the rescue work must be done very quickly and not too accurately...
I am so passionate about archaeology that one of my wet dreams is naming different styles of pottery! But I went to law school first so that I can study archaeology without financial pressure.
That Norsk Folkemuseum in Oslo with the recreated Norse village: it is simply amazing. The best museum I've ever visited. All of the exhibitions are excellent. When I see places like that, I wish I could work there even if it was sweeping the floor (but it must be hard to land a job at a place like that), I can see how anyone who'd visit could be inspired to be an anthropologist
ALSO: For everyone interested, the United State Forest Service's Passport In Time (PIT) program is for volunteers to come help on digs whether archy paleo or otherwise. You don't need any experience and you get to leave all the really boring stuff to other people if you want to. I love it, and you will too! You can just dig, or you can just do lab work, or both, or even neither I guess. www.passportintime.com/
I've just finished my undergrad studying archaeology. Majority of it was theory and that I'm about to start honours I'm finally able to do a field excavation as apart of my course for a few and the lab work analyzing what we find!!
is it actually that hard? i mean... I have a good memory and i love analyzing stuff and making comparisons.... but I'm better with numbers and that stuff (but i don't like it), and I'm considering archaeology as a career option... do you think it is a good choice or not?
Hi skall, I am studying archaeology in Portugal. In my case we didnt work that much with pottery shards, we would have probably only one or two lectures where we woud play around with some finds. About the "juicy part" everyone gets to excavate in the end of every school year, as well as you could go on to as many exavations as you would like as long as they didn't overlap.
As someone who did complete their degree in Archaeology, you hit it just about on the head. On the plus side there are ways to get to the 'meat and bones' as it were. The first one is to just volunteer at an active excavation. Crews are usually short handed and willing to teach what you need to know. There are actual companies here in the states that take you on 'tours' of excavations where you pay to work. Its a great way to get hands on experience. I know that my college had volunteers during my field school that came out for a day or two a week to help out.
Damn! I had exactly the same problems with it. Pottery shards were actually the most interesting thing compared to what I was doing at an excavation of an early medieval village. Guess what - while all others just dug out the dark colored post-holes, I actually dug out a - piece of molten waste iron. I asked what to do with it - I was told: "Gee, you found the blacksmith's shop." - yay. I was hoping for swords. All I got was a lump of metal scum...
Replace a few key terms and you exactly described my experience studying paleontology. I loved the pay-off of being the first to determine sexual dimorphism from the footprints of ancient horseshoe crabs. The hundreds of hours spent squinting through a hand lens to get to where I could determine the shape of a pedipalp from the mark that it made in mud 300 million years ago was not worth it.
I studied Archaeology at Indiana University. I found it to be a fun and interesting field of study - I did a few excavations of 1700 - 1800 dated modern sights. But It took me a while to figure out there is nearly no way to earn a decent living or supporting a family at it, because 90% of the jobs in this field are temporary or short term internships as "shovel bums"... The rest of the jobs are either teaching it to other rubes as a professor or ,if you're well connected, weaseling your way into one of the extremely limited number of spots as an archaeologist for one of the larger museums or the state governments (usually ONE person per US state).
Robert M. Dunn tomayto tomatoe. Not intended to be negative. and it takes quite a bit more than a doctorate. there is a fair amount of social engineering and politicking involved.
I used to want to be a scientist. Until I learned you are basically locked into one field and you spend a good portion of your time begging for grants. Then I tried my hand at writing. I was my own worst critic. Never finished anything because I was never happy with it. Now I make metal things in my yard....
My dream since childhood and adolescence was to become an illustrator/cartoonist... Then I grew up and realized that I wanted a job... so I went for IT. You might want to follow your passion, but hopefully your passion is linked to something that can get you a job because otherwise...
I have a conditional offer to study a degree of archaeology and anthropology, and this has helped me to realize that I will be happy doing the course! Thank you for sharing your own experience!
I studied archaeology for years. went on a couple digs. I love the fact that all those little shards and shells and bits of rock can fit together like a puzzle that paints the history of a place and the people who went before. You're right though, it's a HARD field to get a job in. In order to get enough experience, you need to go on lots of digs and the best ones will cost you a several grand in the States. After a couple years of that, while paying for your masters, you MIGHT get a paid position at a University or maybe a government job. You've got to like camping in remote places, and playing around in the dirt.
you asking a mixed up question, how long something is buried for it to be used in archaeology research. not long. you can dig up things from a year ago and it can be turned archaeological. anything that can help you learnt about the past, not much point in doing that for something only a year old but still. in terms of grave robbing, anything that's buried in a marked grave is off limits. you'd need special permission or court order.
It depends, for exemple for certain countries see a limit of 100 years. However everything that's burried and has potential for knowledge can be considered archaeology. There's a branch called garbage archaeology, wherein research is done in garbage piles, as it can show how people changed their way of life, without it being written down.
It depends heavily on the country's law. But everything before 1800 is usualy consider Archeological. Please not that many countries have laws in place to regulate random people digging stuff up. All historical artifacts (older than 50 years) even on private property are considered to belong to the state here, as an example. So you are not allowed to dig randomly for artifacts.
@@SKreatywny well if you do it like an archaeologist then it not as bad but if you are there just for the possible treasure than you are as bad as Indiana Johnes but it more destructive
@@SKreatywny when I say treasure I dont mean gold or silver I mean bones of kings or nobles, bones of deformed or rare creatures and rare artifacts that are rarer than gold itself.
I took social anthropology in high school, just to see if it was something I would go for. My teacher made us watch The Gods Must Be Crazy, and then talked about it for two weeks. I hated it so much that I immediately switched to Ancient Studies where there was more of a focus on ancient engineering, which, as it turns out, is my true historical passion. How was it made, why did they develop tools and machinery this way, and not a different way. Hiro of Greece was my main subject in that class. I loved his aesthetic style in his inventions. I never pursued any historical courses after high school, however. Maybe I should. Thanks, Skall! I hate the staring at pottery bits part, so, archaeology might not be for me, but something a bit more specialized like ancient engineering could be. I know it's a branch off of archaeology, so I'd still have to spend the time studying the pottery shards. A means to an end!
Skallagrim, I understand and appreciate that you are a very analytic person. However, I don't agree with the statement you make in the start of the video. Not every decisions needs to be analysed to death. My decisions to study physics was not based on hours and hours of research. I just liked physics. I fully agree that it is good to think things through, but dont overthink it. I am not criticizing or arguing with you, I just wanted to point it out. Not sure why.
Great video, I wish there were more videos on youtube of people describing there experience of undergraduate majors. I did something similar by going from Biology to Biological Anthropology, and I think if I stumbled on a video like this for Biology it would have helped me switch earlier.
just left my 3 year Archaeology bachelor degree 2 and a half years in, mainly because I feel the field has found the majority of what it can find, and is now attempting to try and study contemporary artefacts (Which to me just seems completely ridiculous). this is coming from an Australian archaeology piont of view.
Hello Skall, I study archaeology on Warsaw University in Poland, I'm on my second year now and I can tell, that what you say isn't wrong at all but depends on the place where you study. Like I said, I'm on my second year and last summer I had 2 months of practical work on site. The first site was on Mazury near the city of Olsztyn and second site was in small village near Cracow and it was Celtic and German site. The work is pretty hard and you need a lot of stamina, but it's crazy satisfying for a student like me, when you find a really cool stuff. :D
I have no idea if you´re going to see this one day(it´s been 7 years since this comment), but im considering going to Warsaw University and study archaeology there. If you have any tips about it, i would love to hear from you.
Interesting. I was actually thinking about pursuing a degree in history, and briefly thought about archeology, but decided it probably wasn't for me. I'm still debating over whether I should major in history; I honestly have no clue what type of jobs are available for this field, aside from teaching (which I am most definitely not doing). Thought about majoring in software programming or engineering, but I hate math.
Are you any good at public speaking, giving lectures, that sort of thing? If so, keep studying history as well as writing, video editing and communications and start a youtube channel.
I hate math and i'm one of the best in my computer science course ... trust me computers are a lot more than just maths and you will learn fast all aspects of maths you need ... plus you always have google to help you
Some math helps. Especially algebra because, hey, computer programs are using a subset of it at the end of the day. People generally don't hate math, just how it is taught or the long hours of practice needed to be proficient with manual calculation. I prefer to write a program to solve a math problem than to do it manually - or use one. In the past, people doing manual calculation were called computers. :) Likewise writing and understanding proofs - it's tedious, but quite useful even in programming. At the end of the day, good design (say, by contract) is very similar to writing lemmas. Just perhaps less formalized. One thing myself and certain people are allergic to is redundancy and random incompatible notations used in math. Also parallel concepts meaning the same thing but from another branch of mathematics. And the lot of weird niche words they use.
I enjoyed Archaeology quite a bit, but I was lucky in that I got into a program in France in the 90s where you learned theory and site work at the same time. Still wasn't the digging up of Wisby that I wanted it to be though, lol. I eventually switched to a bachelors in medieval studies because pottery is all good and well, but Archaeologists don't find battle sites, either highly educated land surveyors or very lucky metal-detectorists do.
I'm actually doing a double major in Anthropology and biology. Anthro is my passion major and I have the bio one so it can reinforce the Anthro major. Very interesting to know that you were also interested in these subjects as well Skall!
As a lad before knowing any better I'd go digging with my small fork and trowel and uncover all manner of interesting finds from the industrial era to celtic and Roman finds (of course not near any historical sites), it was super fun and it's all I ever wanted to do, but of course that came to an end once I looked into study, although I still metal detect because well coins and such are better found than unfound. Of course rummaging around with no set plan is stabbing in the dark, this is why we have all the methods and ways of doing things in archaeology (so we don't fuck it up amongst many reasons), but really it can for many kill all the fun in it, it did with me. I think many of the Sciences have become boring and dull and wrapped up in Scientific bureaucracy and this discourages more getting involved, really surely there are more interesting and efficient ways of doing things than we currently have come up with, but strangely change is often unwelcome, even when the Scientific process calls for continuous observation, re-evaluation and testing new methods...
My father is archaeologist in medieval castle. Yes it is mostly pottery shards. And other ceramics. In our case there are a lot of ceramic tiles of fireplaces and ceramic pipes. Actually in 99% cases peaces of them. Once we found full box (8 or 10 pieces) of WW2 artillery rounds. Had to call sappers. I don't know if you are right about practical stuff. Archaeology is moving a lot of dirt around. You don't have to have degree for that. We had students from international programs come to help. Some times my brothers and I had to help to cleanup the dig for documenting (I forgot how it is called when artist comes and draws up the dig site). Maybe depends on dig and historic period.
Best to just be an armchair archaeologist, like me. I get my excitement from watching digs on tv (and on youtube). I do a bit of surface hunting for points and sherds, and have been to a few digs, years ago. But I have to eat, so I have a real job, digging was a hobby. My grandfather and uncles were what today is described as grave robbers. They dug into the mounds around here for pots. Back then it wasn't thought to be a bad thing. Times change! BTW, grandfather was cherokee.
I graduated just this last December with a BA in Archaeology from a particular University in Burnaby. What you said at roughly @5:05 in the video is quite true, as is most of of everything else in the rest of the video. However, I'd like to share my opinion that the dry boring theory that frustrated you really IS the juicy practical methodology that helps form your perspectives (of the past and present) and praxis-based theoretical frameworks that enable one to make conclusions as to how things may have been in the distant past. Cultural Anthropology is very similar indeed, except generally (I feel that) you're talking about people who are alive today or were alive in the very near past such that they were involved in some kind of ethnographic endeavour. I went on a field school last summer as part of my Archaeology degree and the real hands-on experience excavating a site was tremendous not only for my desire and CV to work in the field but also to stay interested in archaeology for the future. You never know, you could always go back to school to either audit interesting courses or even to get a certificate or degree!
it's good that you speak about this discipline, i am myself in archaelogy, but in my university(geneva,Switzerland) the learning-practice in field is important at the same point than theory, i spend like all my summers on field with my shovel, pickaxe and other stuff, it was awesome, and i keep going for the moment. If i haven't did all this practice stuff, i think my exprience of arhceology would be less fun
In college, I took an elective introductory course in anthropology. I loved the course, but had to study a lot just to get a B+. It was very interesting, but I'll stick to engineering.
SKAAAALLL! I am a history major and I think you would really enjoy a History degree! With written word it is easier to learn about how people lived in the past and have books to help you remember/consult. This of course would also mesh really well with your historical weaponry interest would provide a good way to keep your historical bearings!
Bwa-Ha-Ha-Ha!!!!! THE BRUTAL TRUTH: Archaeology = "See that garbage can of flint chips over there? Count them and sort them by type of flint."; Cultural Anthropology = "Oh, when they braid their hair in TWO braids means they aren't married and you can......" Seriously though, I took a degree in Anthropology over 45 years ago and I never once worked as an "Anthropologist". During my working career, I have been an Air Force Officer, a machinist, a police officer, a roofer, a fire investigator and worked (deeply) in a minority community. Did the degree help me? Without a doubt: there is no difference in methodology between looking at a bunch of pot shards and trying to envision how they fit together and looking at an old forge hammer, looking for the same thing. The only difference between a fire scene and an archaeology dig is that mine were still dripping. The signs are the same, things collapse in the same way, etc. (Granted, my bodies were a lot fresher, but we won't go there.) Cultural teaches that different is just, well, different, neither better nor worse, but different. When someone not like you calls you a name suggesting you have an Oedipal complex, it's a figure of speech and not to be taken personally (usually). Likewise, you learn that people are people no matter what their nationality or religion is - I was often tasked with taking a group of Arabs, Palestinians, Iranians - all these people who are supposed to hate me because of my nationality out to the South 40 of an air base without fearing for my own safety. You also learn how to do research and write a coherent sentence. Many, many of them, in truth. My choice of headgear, by the way, is a battered old boonie cap, not a Fedora. Never could find one that I liked. Thanks for a good video and a great channel.
I was studying Archaeology and switched to History. The travel thing killed it for me. I don't want to constantly be running across the country. I hate travel.
Well, at least software development is an actually marketable skill. History has much more limited uses.I'm saying that as a former English/Japanese major.
Jarrod Ongchangco I don't mind travelling if I am going someplace interesting. However, I hate spending hours on the road just to get to work, and sleeping in 2 star motels.
Just finished my second field internship, man, you speak the truth!!! Pay is shit, the hours are long and the work can be tedious, (sorting pottery and "sex rocks" ) but it if you like what you are doing it can be awesome.
Something that as always impressed me is how they reconstruct skulls from a million of tiny pieces of bones. Not sure if it's the archaeologists who do that though.
If this had been about chemical engineering and published 14 years ago I would had been so grateful. Really a good thing to publish, even though it didn't help me.
Lucky that i have a pretty good memory as well as geographical understanding. And I did also did four weeks of excavations (two weeks prehistoric and two weeks roman provinces at the Limes)
It would be so amazing to have detailed info about any culture from 20k+ years ago. What they called themselves, how their families were structured, how they dealt with their neighbors, how their government worked, what their clothes looked like, etc. We get so little from the traces that last that long.
The issue of finding a job in said field is the same for just about any scientific field these days. The job market is so limited and the number of applicants so larger that it is really just luck if you find a job in your field. That's why I'm a welder by training and a amateur paleontologist by hobby.
Robert M. Dunn Private sector with Chem degrees is one thing. Academic positions with degrees like Paleontology, archaeology, and anthropology is difficult. Don't get me started on historians.
Was thinking about doing Archaeology/Anthropology in Mexico. Always been interested in the Aztec and in Mesoamerica. Kinda hope there is more to it than just studying pottery.
This is the kind of thing that should exist for different "career/education fields" you are supposed be able to select as a kid (or even as a near 40 year old thinking about what do I want to do when I grow up). Even though I've never been interested in archeology I had an idea on the pattern recognizing that is involved in separating a rock from a 3000 year old coffee mug broken into 1000 pieces, but I had not thought about the memory you actually need behind that. Even though in Finland education/career choice is not that critical as education is cheap/free and changing your route is relatively simple (if your are ready to work for it). These kinds of video form insights to different fields/jobs would really be good to have. A few minute videos from people both graduated, not graduated and on the job should at least advise on the choice a lot better than any text or any aptitude tests that I guess are still used somewhere. The Dirty Jobs series with Mike Rowe did a huge thing in this: "These are the crappies parts of these jobs, but these people have what it takes to do them, they enjoy the jobs and because of that they usually make a good living and are happy".
I have a somewhat ... inverted experience that eventually lead to the same conclusion. It started with the digs - I went on many digs all summers since mid-highschool to late university years, befriended the people and the field (ha!), went to so many lectures that archaeology ended up my Minor. (Btw, I also have the kind of memory that deals well with broad strokes, but I literally cannot memorize numbers. Or recite names with certainty.) I loved the hands-on, down-in-dirt aspect (no amount of classroom study can give you the "feel of past" like slowly shoveling through the ground until those layers of past form a simple display, or scooping sand away from an old skeleton with a spoon); at some point I tried to take it to the next level and supervise a little trench of my own, with all the cataloguing and report-writing that came with that. And that's the part that requires factual memory, and also bureaucratic focus, and where I recognized I wasn't the right kind of person to carry those responsibilities. [the end]
You know, as someone with multiple archeologists in the group of "close friends" and family (as well as an historian), each with different specializations, this is intriguing to me. One studied in Uppsala (Sweden), his thesis was on vendel period migration patterns (if I remember correctly), one studied in São Paulo (Brazil) and worked on mesoamerican cultures such as the Olmec, Maya and Aztec (and he is currently in Guatemala on a dig) and one specialized in egyptian pictographs (not sure this is how it is correctly written) and religion in one of the many dynasties there, and she spends half her time there. Funnily enough, only one of the three is actually working in the field. I do not suppose it is too personal a question to ask if you would have a specific culture in the world you would rather study, had you kept up with archeology? EDIT: If you could choose, I mean, not being limited by geography...
Hey Random2! Do you mean those friends of yours did their master/phD in Egypt/Brasil etc.. or did they just start studying there since undergraduate level? I am asking as I am interested in studying archaeology too at uni and now I am really uncertain ... I really like egyptology and I don't know whether I should just start my undergraduate in Cairo university or I should do the undergraduate in the UK where they have overall better facilities and the program looks more science-based and focused on recent innovations in the field. Thank you for your answer,I really need advice now!
I'm confused between choosing Archeology or Anthropology for my Master's degree. Thanks for your clarification. It's helping me in deciding better. I'm more inclined towards studying different cultures and diversity and how interestingly different yet similar different cultures are. I think I should choose anthropology.
I had a similar experience with archaeology, but I didn't even get to stare at sherds (there was only one practical unit). And I wasn't that interested in prehistoric Australia and Asia-Pacific.
Hey Skall. In Poland we start our studies with a monthly practice. We have it every summer holidays, so I think starting archeology in Poland is more interesting than in Germany.
My mother had the EXACT same feedback about her experience studying Archaeology... she dropped it because she sat in her University in Copenhagen, Denmark and stared at pottery shards for eternities >< Seems archaeology in Scandinavia is a little bit dry, and if not dry then muddy, smelly, and unclear. Fascinating, but with a lot of mostly-boring parts for some people.
"Ritual Sacrifice" seems to be the go-to term Archaeologists use when they aren't sure what an item is or what an area was used for, that's the thing that bugs me watching those shows. I think they just say that because it sounds much more dramatic than the dozens of other possible explanations.
I do lament that most professions aren't about what they say they are about. One of the hardest parts about growing up is when your dreams as a child are crushed by the cruel reality of the work they entail. Archaeology isn't about dinosaurs and exploration, as much as it is the world's hardest hidden object game, but no reference list for what you are looking for. Personal story time: Essential tremors is one of my greatest banes. I have very shaky hands/limbs/general demeanor, which means that for any task I perform there is a very large volume of imprecision. You wouldn't think that shaky hands is that big of a deal, but the crushing reality is that nearly every job requires a great deal of specialized precision. I learned this the hard way about a half-dozen times. I wanted to be a civil engineer first. Except that most of civil engineering is making small, precise models and seeing how they handle proportional stresses. But, I can't make models, because my hands shake too much. So everything falls apart and I can't pass the classes. Civil Engineering is mostly about building miniatures, and arguing with people about why your miniature is better. The job is, like, 50% arguing. Graphical Design was my second option. I thought "If I'm using computers, I can just adjust any mistakes I make later". Except that a large portion of designing is storyboarding everything out by hand, and I cannot draw accurately. Again, I can't pass the classes. They don't teach you to draw, they just expect you to be able to do so. But hey, if you can already draw, then you should get into computer design, because its basically drawing. Also, being a night owl helps, because realistic deadlines aren't a thing here. Electrical Engineers make a lot of money. Problem is, most of electrical engineering is working with incredibly small and frail parts at high temperatures. I can't solder, and I have the burn scars on my fingers to prove it. In that class, I lagged behind hard, because I couldn't pass the basic "solder these wire joints together". It was so bad, that well-doing classmates tried to give me their joints, saying "Just cheat, man. This is painful". Working with electronics is basically water colors with a 400 degree pen. Every time you fail to color inside the lines, it costs a lot of money. I also hope you're physically fit, because you'll spend most of your day crawling through tight spaces at non-safe altitudes. At this point, I realized that I can't do most careers, because they all entail the same thing. Want to be a chef? The difference between some cayenne pepper and 3 times as much cayenne pepper is the most minuscule of wrist motions. Also, a chef spends most of their day yelling at people to do things. I definitely can't be a musician, since the average space between guitar strings is smaller than the high end variance in my tremors. Doctor? Poor handwriting and poor skills with a scalpel will end up murdering people. Policeman? I'd break all the evidence and I can't shoot straight to save a life, literally. Most police work is filling out forms, and my handwriting is illegible. Health and fitness? I can't "lift" or even "move" properly, and I injure myself nearly every time I physically exert myself. Though weights resit movement, my wrists/shoulders/knees don't. Natural Sciences. At college now. This should be fun! Sociology is really psychology. Psychology is really biology. Biology is really chemistry. Chemistry is really physics. Physics is really math. Math is really logic. Logic is really philosophy. Philosophy is really language. Language is really Sociology. Social Sciences are really politics. Pick the one you want to learn, then move left one to get the actual major you should have. No matter what you pick, though, it all boils down to one subject: creativity. Because even in Chemistry, the most solid and practical of sciences, you have to develop a thesis and defend it if you want a degree. Hope you get an idea by the time you get there. If you happen to be a particularly unimaginative fellow, then that means you can't learn science. Because college isn't designed for practical application. College is a place for philosophizing. AKA, arguing. I, of course, am an unimaginative person who would be content to stare at a wall if stimuli weren't easily available everywhere. But, at the end of the day, I'm stuck with mathematics. Both because I show an aptitude for it (though really everyone else is just utterly terrible), and also because poor handwriting isn't an issue for waxing philosophic. Most people change their careers frequently, because only the most gifted and ideologically driven can aim for a dream job and not be discouraged when the real work is nothing like what you had imagined.
It actually offers better job opportunities than archaeology, more flexibility. I even did a consumer insight study once (the company was looking specifically for cultural anthropologists to gather qualitative data).
I wonder, though: How do anthropologists studying tribal peoples live with themselves knowing they let their very subjects remain in such a backward state? I'd sooner go forth and advance their society. They'd join the 21st century kicking and screaming on my watch. There's no reason why anyone should still live like a savage hunter-gatherer and cling to religious beliefs which shouldn't have survived a grade school education in 2017 or ever. As for me, I'm more of a paleontology, evolutionary biology, and astronomy guy. If you have kids and one or more of them has an interest in paleontology, heed my advice: DO NOT LET THEM WATCH JURASSIC PARK, THE LAND BEFORE TIME, ICE AGE, OR ANY OTHER MOVIE WITH PALEOFAUNA IN IT. Don't let your kids watch those movies unless you want to show them how NOT to make these kinds of movies. Hell, even the Beeb's Walking With... series of documentaries is guilty of a bunch of errors. And Jurassic World? Oh boy. Steven Spielberg and everyone else involved in making that movie had 22 years to get the science right and they still fucked it all up! How? Let me count the ways (Keep in mind that my main experience is with the first JP movie): 1. Digging for fossils. Real paleontologists do not look like they just got a shower after a hard day's work of excavating a dig site. They look dirty as hell, almost like they've seen heavy combat but without the bullets and bombs. You can forget about dino nose-picking, too; fossil vertebrates' remains are encased in hard rock. It's soft rock on the Mohs scale, being sedimentary, but still too hard to just brush away and reveal something. It can take months just to find a protruding bone. Once the remains are uncovered, they have to be carefully chiseled, jackhammered, or even exploded out of the surrounding rock. 2. Cloning the dead critters back to life. You don't get fresh dinosaur blood (nor the blood out of any other long-dead animal) out of a fossilized mosquito encased in amber! The DNA would also be too degraded to use, and the eggshells they used in the movie are impossible to make with our current technology. You'd have better luck cloning a moa, elephant bird, mammoth, aurochs (which actually are being bred back, just not JP-style), Steller's sea cow, thylacine, Carolina parakeet, dodo, cave lion, or the American varieties of horse and cheetah! 66 million-year-old dinosaur DNA would have already degraded too much to be of any use. Even if we forgave all this, you couldn't use frog DNA to suture up the gaps in the genome, either. Frogs and dinosaurs are on opposite branches of the tetrapod family tree. WE'RE more closely related to dinosaurs than any amphibian is! The zygote wouldn't survive fertilization, and even if it did, it'd look more like some Lovecraftian horror. You'd have better luck using the DNA of today's dinosaurs: Birds. And what of the plants? How were Mesozoic PLANTS bred back? Xylem cloning? NEVER EXPLAINED! 3. Jurassic Park? More like CRETACEOUS Park! Out of the genera shown in the first movie alone, only TWO actually lived during the Jurassic Period--Dilophosaurus and Brachiosaurus--and even then at very different times. A T. rex from the Cretaceous walking alongside a Brachiosaurus from the Jurassic? I don't think so! 4. The brachiosaurs. They would not have been able to stand on their hind legs. Their bodies weren't evolved for it, and if they could, they'd cause some pretty big seismic tremors when they got back down on all fours. They wouldn't have eaten eucalyptus leaves, which would have been as toxic to them as they are to most animals today. They didn't sneeze, either; only mammals do that. 5. A Triceratops shitting out its own body weight? PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE! 6. The dilophosaurs. These Jurassic theropods did not have those neck frills, nor did they spit venom. There isn't any evidence suggesting they did, but then again, they were already badass enough without such accoutrements. They were also bigger than the one in the movie (maybe it was a juvenile), and lightly built. Had dilophosaurs lived to the late Cretaceous, they'd have been able to outrun a T. rex. 7. The T. rex. Jesus Hernandez Christ, did they fuck that one up. Real tyrannosaurs would not have shaken the ground with their footsteps. If they did, they'd make for some shitty predators. There's no evidence that they had motion-based vision, either. T. rex did, however, have huge olfactory bulbs in its skull and could thus SMELL you coming, so those kids in the Jeep should have died right then and there. They weren't scaly, either--they had FEATHERS. We can easily see this in T. rex's Asian cousins, Yutyrannus and Dilong. They didn't roar, either; we've got a fossil syrinx from a late Cretaceous bird, Vegavis iaai, which shows that their vocal tracts weren't evolved for roaring. Real non-bird dinosaurs would have sooner cooed, quacked, tweeted, or crowed like birds. Sorry, Spielberg, no roaring tyrannosaurs or dromaeosaurs ("raptors"). Try again. 8. The dromaeosaurs. The critters shown in the movie weren't of the genus Velociraptor. They were more likely Deinonychus (Utahraptor was significantly bigger, but wasn't discovered until after the first JP movie came out). Real velociraptors were no bigger than turkeys; to win a fight against a human, they'd have to take on a toddler. Like the tyrannosaurs above, dromaeosaurs also had feathers. We've found quill knobs on Velociraptor forearms and feather impressions on other dromaeosaur remains such as those of the four-winged gliding dinosaur Microraptor. "Raptors" also wouldn't have been able to work door handles without breaking their quasi-wings. Their hands did not lay prone, but were held with the palms facing each other, like someone clapping their hands. Deinonychus wasn't very bright, either; that honor goes to the more birdlike Troodon, which had the biggest ratio of brain size to body mass of any non-bird theropod. 9. The predators' behavior near humans. Real predators, past or present, would NEVER drop whatever they're doing to chase a human being, especially if they're already eating. This violates biological common sense. Think of it like this: If you're at a restaurant and just tucking into a big entree, WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU THROW IT ON THE FLOOR TO CHASE A WAITER CARRYING APPETIZERS? 10. The pteroaurs from the second and fourth movies. Real pterosaurs could not walk bipedally or perch on trees like birds. Nor is there any pterosaur species known to have had prehensile feet, so grabbing things with their hind feet is right out. Pterosaurs were quadrupeds, and very competent at walking on all fours. If you were to get a TARDIS and go back in time to the late Cretaceous, a huge Pteranodon, Hatzegopteryx, or other large pterosaur would sooner walk or gallup up to you. They were too front-heavy to walk on their hind legs like birds. You can forget about hovering pterosaurs or even riding on one, because their wing membranes, supported by that really long pinky finger, wouldn't allow it. They weren't dinosaurs, either. The clade Dinosauria encompasses the descendants of the last common ancestor of Triceratops and the house sparrow, and this definition excludes pterosaurs. Pterosaurs and dinosaurs are on opposite branches of the ornithodiran archosaur family tree. 11. Jurassic World's mosasaur. The genus shown, Tylosaurus, was only half as long as the one in the movie. Real tylosaurs got to be no bigger than 12.2 meters long; the one in the movie is twice as long and might as well have been a kaiju. FAIL!
How do you define "religious beliefs which shouldn't have survived a grade school education," exactly? I sure hope you are an Atheist. Because most religions have similar amounts of supernatural belief involved.
This was insightful, I do have a lot of patience for detailed investigations but also get excited for the "juicy stuff" . Could you explain more about your major 'Cultural Anthrology' and how its different.
I found a notched flint arrowhead while huntin' crawdads as a kid, it became a personal talisman for me. I'd take it out and look at it and wonder how old it was and what kind of life the person who made it had. I think I know what attracts people to archaeology.
I am studying sociology myself, and working multiple jobs as well. I think we are of roughly similar age, and are finding out our memories aren't as happy to just memorize things as much as they used to be :p.
Yeah I had a similar experience with biotechnology. It sounded so great working with deadly viruses, changes to modern scientific development and design. Then the truth was 90% of the time you are staring at glass slides of the same samples over and over, ticking boxes in paperwork. I quickly dropped out of that field.
I opted for a History degree instead of Archaeology initially due to me not liking to actually do manual labour. And I stand by that idiotic choice to this day! I'm on my way to a doctorate and couldn't be happier! (Especially because I've suffered for years first by trying Chemistry and then Industrial Engineering, so the lesson here is: Do what you love.)
I've studied history and have been unemployed ever since I finished it (2 years). Though I live in a shitty country in recession. While it was good for the knowledge I've gained, every day I wish I had done something more useful.
As a former biology major, I have to say that I'm not sure what this gentleman could so for a living in any field with an academic bent. Hope he found a fit for himself.
I really wish I could make a longer reply here. Suffice it to say that: 1. The need for all this pottery typology and other 'boring' stuff is real. You need to be able to make these kinds of comparisons. And I know it must be boring. I think it is essential to take all this stuff into consideration. 2. On the other hand, asking people to memorize these things may not be the most effective way of understanding whether a person is qualified to understand and research this kind of thing. The ability to memorize is not necessarily indicative of the ability to reason and figure things out. The truth is I don't know whether that would be helpful, because I haven't spent the time studying and thinking about it scientifically. PS I'm a mathematician. I got a Ph.D. Looking for a job is a pain in the arse. I am passionate about what I study, but finding a job isn't very easy. So I have experience with these kinds of issues with finding jobs.
Petrology (Pottery study) is not the greatest of module sections, however, some aspects of archaeology (as of 2016-2017) include GIS and mapping software and database production and many aspects of analytical softwares and systems which are utilised by all manners of organisations and businesses. One such company is Google, they use software similar to GIS. The real problem about any degree is selling yourself in the best light. I understand that the study of Archaeology is different from university to university but it's what you make of your time that counts.
Staring at pottery for hours.. So true haha ;'( :'( They did formulate job opportunities that harsh in my case :D The market is getting a lot better though. Over here at least.
For Celtic history, Ireland is a rich source. The likes of the Ulster cycle, Fenian cycle and historical cycle are taken from a lot of sources and records, some of which are accurate and some of which are purely mythos such is the norm when looking at bronze age records (people had quite the imagination back then)
Wait till you start looking at Mesoamerican finds and the presence or absence of plastered walls, pre or post Aztec. It's an interesting field if you can get into it and understand it. Go for it if you've got the interest, but it's not like the TV shows and digs are pretty boring, tough and not that very experimental. Experimental stuff is pretty rare in the field. Battlefield, Europe is your home.
Skall could you do a bit of critical analysis on the design of Fiore dei Liberi's sword and poleaxe ideas portrayed in Fior di Battalgia? By the way, the poleaxe is also a chemical weapon
citizengiants Soil Monkey would just be referring to basic grunt work volunteering on digs carrying buckets of soil about and helping dig stuff while the PhD's walk about pointing at things. In the EU there's a lot of sites, so lots of places to volunteer, but your best bet would be doing a degree.
While I would agree with you that Typology can get very tiring and you certainly are required to know a lot, not only about archaelogical finds itself but also about the various scientific methods - I would say that this broad spectrum makes it very open for specialised research(ers). Just as my preferred method: Experimental Archaeology, which very much tries to recreate aspects of the past, like certain ways of metalworking, weavery or even swordfighting with practical experiments, which in turn are often based on contemporary ethnographical comparisons. That's also the reason I made this comment: To show that (Prehistorical) Archaelogy is more than just staring at pieces of broken pottery, it's an interdisciplinary field of study with many differnet branches to specialise in. And a very interesting one indeed :)
Pottery is useful, but I've always felt that you have to be a bit careful using it as your only dating tool because there's a bit of a circular argument going on: Q: How do you know this site is 1500 years old? A: Because we found this 1500 year old pottery here. Q: Ok, so how do you know this pottery is 1500 years old? A: Because we dug it out of this 1500 year old site.
Well, the pottery in fact gives you relative dating, since we know which style of pottery came before which. For the absolute chronological dating (the year, or at least century) we need other methods, like radiocarbon dating or dendrochronology.
I'm a working archaeologist in North America (The Pacific Northwest & Great Basin...Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Utah & Nevada primarily).
Some basic facts about actually doing it for a living:
1. Most of the paying work is to satisfy legal requirements. We very rarely excavate. Mostly it's "survey". If some kind of engineering project (like a new power line or road) is being built, we have to go in there and walk around the project area and see what's there. Sometimes you might dig small hole just to test, but formal excavation is very rare.
2. There's prehistoric stuff all over the place just laying on the ground. Once you train your eyes on what to look for, it's all over the place.
3. We have to count rusty cans. The regulations are written so that anything that's 50 years or older qualifies as potentially historically significant. In the areas I work in, this means I spend a lot of time counting rusty cans from old camps. They don't tell you about this in school.
4. The pay sucks, and employment is sporadic. In any other field with my level of education (masters) and experience, I'd make double what I do now.
5. It's a really small community. You're never more than 2 degrees removed from any other archaeologist you meet. This makes for a lot of gossip and drama. This is another thing they don't tell you in school.
6. It's a lot of fun! You get to go hiking and camping with your friends and they pay you for it! Granted, it's not much money, but my job is to literally go into the wilderness with like-minded weirdos and hike around and look for stuff. After a day of hiking and looking, it's time for libations at a dive bar in whatever tiny one-horse hick town we're staying in.
Yes, I could make more in some other profession, but doing archaeology is good for you. Marching around outdoors miles and miles away from civilization is good for you physically and psychologically. It's healthy, overall it's a helluva good time, and even the miserable times make for decent stories later. I've been stranded overnight, shot at, lost, almost struck by lightning, etc. etc., and wouldn't exchange any of it for being chained to a computer under fluorescent lights.
My recommendation: Try it, but keep your options open. Go to Archaeological Field School, and then get a paid job for the summer field season while you're not in school. Do this for a couple summers and see if you like it. If you do like it, get a master's ASAP. If not, you're not out anything, and I promise at the very least you'll have some interesting memories.
Interesting!
Thank you. I'm an aspiring archaeologist and I've been trying to get the "real" scoop on how the work really is and your comment has helped me a lot. I honestly think I'm still gonna do it...might even do a little treasure hunting while at it.
In North America archaeology sounds boring, in Europe, we dig a lot.
@@BlacStarArmory treasure hunting aka stealing and looting.
May I ask where you studied and what degree you have? I am starting school this fall and I’m studying anthropology I am really interested in archaeology specifically!
The main problem with Archaeology: you don't actually fight Nazis or find magical artifacts and people still treat you like a douche for wearing a fedora.
What?! Are you telling me that Indy lied to me? Because I have seen his documentaries about stuff like the holy grail. :P
Completely untrue. We have a module at the end of each year on fighting Nazis, Although they're thinking of changing the class to focus more on ISIS next year. Traditionally it focuses on skills with throwing trowels, revolvers, and cardiovascular endurance, but some more modern universities teach dual pistols and acrobatics. And the type of fedora really determines how people regard you.
A thinner brim increases likelihood of ridicule, while wider brims when coupled with a bullwhip and trowel multiply how much archaeology you have. The materials are also important in the hat.
Other hats such as the classic Tweed Bucket hat as sported by the true and accurate historical figure, Henry Jones Senior are also a good source of archaeology.
#Savage
^ The first thought that came to mind was Dora the Explorer.
And X never, ever marks the spot.
I've always wanted to go to an archeology dig site to find an ancient sword pommel to end my enemies just and rightly.
Noah Vasquez You and me both. Modern day pommels just aren't as effective.
I wonder what the individual who wrote that manual would think about this becoming a meme...
I swear if I ever make a game I will have a legendary sword with the ability to screw off the pommel after about half a year of channeling time and instakill an enemy. Oh and of course the Narrator would shout END THEM RIGHTLY! when you do it. Or the party members if there's no narrator.
I wonder what the individual who wrote that manual would think of ACTUALLY USING THAT TECHNIQUE.
same
Archeology translator:
Archeologist: This a religious ceremonial item!
Translation: We have no records about this item, and absolutely no clue what this is.
Yep, even archaeologists themselves joke about that.
I would love to see one of your drawings.
You already said that in a video, if i'm not mistaken HAHAHA
Eh. That is not always the case here in North America. It goes more like this:
Archeologist: This a religious ceremonial item!
Native American: No, that's a piece of cookware.
Even more vague: "Item for ritual use".
Now we want to see a video of Skall staring at pottery shards. Right?
Kinda...
Sherds. Spelling it with an e increases your archaeology by a factor of three.
Tom Brown +1 To historical accuracy!
They're shards because he hit it with his pommel
he ended them rightly
That sweater looks incredibly comfy.
Thank you. I am a high school teacher. Although my students don't talk about being archeologists, your comments on practical career considerations is useful and topical. I can see myself using this in the classroom.
Wow nice💙
As a person doing a Ph.D. in Prehistoric Archeology I think this video is absolutely mandatory for everyone thinking of jumping the bandwagon of this area of knowledge. Sadly, Archeology is not about "knowing how the people lived", but about "how to know how the people lived". It requires technique and method, and almost never intuition, nor imagination. It's 50% slow-paced excavation, 50% staring at long Access databases/AutoCAD designs/typology catalogues. It's a method, not a science (or that's what most of the good profesional arcaheologists would tell you about their work, but I don't deny there's a lot of archaeologists that see themselves as "scientifics", lol)
Still, it has a lot of fascinating things if you are up to take the "hard tour". It is not a bad thing if you decline Archaeology in favor of more "flavoured" fields of historical and social enquiry like Sociology, History or even Philology: there will always be things you like more and do you better than others, and all this fields of enquiry are equally important to the knowledge of our past (everything is better than reading a Tsoukalos book and start pointing at UFOs at every monumental site and deny any other explanation).
So, as an arcaheologist, I'm totally with this video: Arcaheology isn't for everyone, but there are more options you can think of if the past times amaze you.
He IS an archaeologist since he has to be an archaeologist to be doing a Ph.D. in Prehistoric Archaeology. I don't know how the procedure is in Dudeland though.
I must say, it has been a childhood dream of mine becoming an archaeologist and for the same reasons as you Skall, I wanted to know how ancient cultures lived. And honestly, the more you talked the more I was being fascinated, you revealed so much new stuff that I wasn't even aware was part of archaeology and it made it all the more exciting. I live in Israel and I have visited a few archaeological sites to the north and south, but what I want the most is to travel across Europe and see some of ruines that inspired the greatest minds in history
I wanted to study archaeology since I was 11 years old, I ended up going to Boston University and graduating with my BA in archaeology in 2015. I can relate to most of what you've said here (except that I find pottery sherds and serialization interesting). Many of my professors (not to mention my parents) said the exact same thing - you won't find a job. It's hard when the folks you look up to in the field tell you not to bother. I was lucky enough to have excavation be a requirement for my degree, and got to dig at a Maya site in Guatemala.
Since graduating, I've taken a job in software sales to pay the bills. I'm not sure if I'll go back to school to pursue archaeology or go in another direction. I will never regret studying archaeology, it is an absolutely fascinating field and there is much work to be done in the world by archaeologists. Thanks for making an honest video about the reality of it. If you want to study something and pursue a career in it, don't let anyone stand in your way, but it also helps to have realistic expectations and an open mind
I study archaeology too - in central Europe btw, and our teachers told us the same thing at the beginning. It was harsh, but hey, challenge accepted! :)
I'm currently in my second year of a B.A. in Archaeology, and have to agree with you on the subject of looking at pot sherds. Last semester I spent around 40 hours in my University's museum counting the size, shape, and number of grains of sand in the profile of broken pots. However I was lucky enough to get to go to Jordan on a dig for about a month in the summer following my Freshman year and it was really that experience that really convinced me that this was the right fit, and all the grunt work was worth it. I'll be going to the same site again next year, and while not every school offers opportunities like this, I personally wouldn't recommend giving up on a discipline without trying out the fun parts first.
Archeology is 30% history/finds, 70% making maps, writing papers. Be warned.
-Archeology student
That actually sounds decent
how much you can make after your masters program? depending where you live.
Writing grants will kill you
THIS IS SO COOL
I am studying prehistoric archaeology in germany and I literally cracked up when you said "it involves staring at tiny pottery shards for hours" XD
You are from abstergo
As a working archaeologist in the UK I thought this was quite good. I've never had to memorize much for pottery beyond the basic identification of if it's diagnostic and sometimes a rough period but perhaps it's different where you studied. And yeah the career does require a decent amount of travel, things seem to be picking up here in terms of the availability of jobs though, there is a huge surge in infrastructure projects and the archaeology companies can't find as much staff as they need currently so they're all desperate for people, which is slowly driving up wages. Doesn't mean you'll ever be able to buy a porsche or fly first class though. Does mean everyone thinks your job is really cool!
Hello! I would really like to study archeology. I really like history and i watched many documentairies and i read a lot about it. I am only concerned about the fact that my math and chemistry are not good. Is this really a problem? Because i really have interest and passion for history.
@@Arthur-gs2jr I currently am looking towards taking archaeology in the near future (university) too. I take chemistry as a subject and to be quite honest, if you don't already have basic knowledge of processes of chemistry then this may be a difficult subject to endorse from ground 0.
In saying this, if you are passionate to do what it takes to learn chemistry then don't be afraid to do so. I do believe chemistry is only needed to an extent. Like anything, having the prior education will allow for further understanding between what you may be studying.
Goodluck!
Thank you so much for this honest and detailed account of studying Archeology...One can tell it's causing you much more pain and frustration than pleasure, and since job opportunitities are scarce, you porbably made the best decision to leave it behind. I like history and the scientific part wouldn't scare me off as much because there is a laboratory aspect to it apparently (dating schards and studying patterns) which is still something that wouldn't bother me. Again, depends on how your thinking processes feel most comfortable and what your true passion is.
Honestly, this just furthers my interest in archaeology; definitely something I want to further consider
What about now are you still doing it
I think 'reasons you _should_ consider being a ... from someone who decided not to be'... should be a thing. Gave a lot of insight into how to temper your expectations, and approach a field of study from a grounded perspective.
Hi Skall! I'm quite glad that yu made a video about this (being an archaeology student) and hearing your experiences on it, I can recognise some stuff (even if I'm only in my first year) still I think what you're saying is quite good and accurate and I'm glad you're saying that people should do what they love and what they are passionate about. I can gladly say that where I'm from, the job market is quite big (for now) we're drowning in work because of new regulations saying that when people have the intention to build something on a plot of land, they need to have an archaeological study whether or not ther eis archaeological interest. Like you said it does differ from country to country and I am ery lucky to be in mine because of several reasons. We do have the technological stuff but we also have practical classes in our second semester. In shorter terms: I liked your video.
Hey Ludi Lombardi! I am very interested in archaeology too and I would love to study it at uni next year!Where are you from,or better yet,what is this country "archaeology-friendly" you're talking bout? And another curiosity: in this digs you've written about (think they're called rescue archaeology) do the architets/building bosses tell you like "you've got 6 months and after that we are going to build the building"?Becouse I know "normal" digs last years and years,so I assume the rescue work must be done very quickly and not too accurately...
Justice ain't gonna dispense itself.
Coming from a dude with an Enclave profile, that statement seems much more ominous.
It's high noon somewhere in the world...
THE POWER OF 10,000 FOLDED NIPPON STEEL WILL PREVEIL...RYUJIN NO KEN WO KURAE !
I am so passionate about archaeology that one of my wet dreams is naming different styles of pottery! But I went to law school first so that I can study archaeology without financial pressure.
same here 🥺
That Norsk Folkemuseum in Oslo with the recreated Norse village: it is simply amazing. The best museum I've ever visited. All of the exhibitions are excellent. When I see places like that, I wish I could work there even if it was sweeping the floor (but it must be hard to land a job at a place like that), I can see how anyone who'd visit could be inspired to be an anthropologist
ALSO: For everyone interested, the United State Forest Service's Passport In Time (PIT) program is for volunteers to come help on digs whether archy paleo or otherwise. You don't need any experience and you get to leave all the really boring stuff to other people if you want to. I love it, and you will too! You can just dig, or you can just do lab work, or both, or even neither I guess.
www.passportintime.com/
I've just finished my undergrad studying archaeology. Majority of it was theory and that I'm about to start honours I'm finally able to do a field excavation as apart of my course for a few and the lab work analyzing what we find!!
is it actually that hard? i mean... I have a good memory and i love analyzing stuff and making comparisons.... but I'm better with numbers and that stuff (but i don't like it), and I'm considering archaeology as a career option... do you think it is a good choice or not?
Thanks for the dating advice i met my soul mate
Grandmaster Kush let me guess, she smokes weed?
Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi No she takes krokodil, my lord.
Hot damn, I bet that's one attractive lady, what with her arm disintegrating from the krokodil and all that!
Нет! Она должна остановиться!
now tell us about cultural anthropology
I love how people like you pretend to be politically informed.Way to dismiss a whole branch of study. "hurr durr feminazis hurr durr sjws...''
Hi skall, I am studying archaeology in Portugal. In my case we didnt work that much with pottery shards, we would have probably only one or two lectures where we woud play around with some finds. About the "juicy part" everyone gets to excavate in the end of every school year, as well as you could go on to as many exavations as you would like as long as they didn't overlap.
As someone who did complete their degree in Archaeology, you hit it just about on the head. On the plus side there are ways to get to the 'meat and bones' as it were. The first one is to just volunteer at an active excavation. Crews are usually short handed and willing to teach what you need to know. There are actual companies here in the states that take you on 'tours' of excavations where you pay to work. Its a great way to get hands on experience. I know that my college had volunteers during my field school that came out for a day or two a week to help out.
may I ask for recommendations for these tours?
Damn! I had exactly the same problems with it. Pottery shards were actually the most interesting thing compared to what I was doing at an excavation of an early medieval village. Guess what - while all others just dug out the dark colored post-holes, I actually dug out a - piece of molten waste iron. I asked what to do with it - I was told: "Gee, you found the blacksmith's shop." - yay.
I was hoping for swords. All I got was a lump of metal scum...
As a fellow archeologist, I can vouch for all the facts Skall mentioned.
Replace a few key terms and you exactly described my experience studying paleontology. I loved the pay-off of being the first to determine sexual dimorphism from the footprints of ancient horseshoe crabs. The hundreds of hours spent squinting through a hand lens to get to where I could determine the shape of a pedipalp from the mark that it made in mud 300 million years ago was not worth it.
I studied Archaeology at Indiana University. I found it to be a fun and interesting field of study - I did a few excavations of 1700 - 1800 dated modern sights. But It took me a while to figure out there is nearly no way to earn a decent living or supporting a family at it, because 90% of the jobs in this field are temporary or short term internships as "shovel bums"... The rest of the jobs are either teaching it to other rubes as a professor or ,if you're well connected, weaseling your way into one of the extremely limited number of spots as an archaeologist for one of the larger museums or the state governments (usually ONE person per US state).
Robert M. Dunn tomayto tomatoe. Not intended to be negative.
and it takes quite a bit more than a doctorate. there is a fair amount of social engineering and politicking involved.
Not when it's a government job...
I used to want to be a scientist. Until I learned you are basically locked into one field and you spend a good portion of your time begging for grants.
Then I tried my hand at writing. I was my own worst critic. Never finished anything because I was never happy with it.
Now I make metal things in my yard....
The dwarf after trying to be a wizard :
My dream since childhood and adolescence was to become an illustrator/cartoonist... Then I grew up and realized that I wanted a job... so I went for IT. You might want to follow your passion, but hopefully your passion is linked to something that can get you a job because otherwise...
I have a conditional offer to study a degree of archaeology and anthropology, and this has helped me to realize that I will be happy doing the course! Thank you for sharing your own experience!
I studied archaeology for years. went on a couple digs. I love the fact that all those little shards and shells and bits of rock can fit together like a puzzle that paints the history of a place and the people who went before. You're right though, it's a HARD field to get a job in. In order to get enough experience, you need to go on lots of digs and the best ones will cost you a several grand in the States. After a couple years of that, while paying for your masters, you MIGHT get a paid position at a University or maybe a government job. You've got to like camping in remote places, and playing around in the dirt.
How long does something have to be buried for before digging it up is considered archeology and not grave robbing?
you asking a mixed up question, how long something is buried for it to be used in archaeology research. not long. you can dig up things from a year ago and it can be turned archaeological. anything that can help you learnt about the past, not much point in doing that for something only a year old but still. in terms of grave robbing, anything that's buried in a marked grave is off limits. you'd need special permission or court order.
It depends, for exemple for certain countries see a limit of 100 years. However everything that's burried and has potential for knowledge can be considered archaeology. There's a branch called garbage archaeology, wherein research is done in garbage piles, as it can show how people changed their way of life, without it being written down.
Dan_from_the_internet If it ain't illegal, it's archaeology.
Here in the USA? 50 years. Literally. That is how long it take for something to be NHPA eligible.
It depends heavily on the country's law. But everything before 1800 is usualy consider Archeological.
Please not that many countries have laws in place to regulate random people digging stuff up. All historical artifacts (older than 50 years) even on private property are considered to belong to the state here, as an example.
So you are not allowed to dig randomly for artifacts.
Did the Ancients trow pommels too or were they too primitive for such technology/advanced warfare techniques?
I'm pretty sure the advancement of removable pommels didn't arise until the medieval period. Until then, men were ended in battle, but not rightly.
Noted: skip archaeology, go with grave robbing instead. Less time in school and more profit.
plz dont do that
Grave robbing sounds kinda fun 🤔
@@SKreatywny well if you do it like an archaeologist then it not as bad but if you are there just for the possible treasure than you are as bad as Indiana Johnes but it more destructive
@@TheEnabledDisabled I mean I doubt there would be any valuable treasure to be found. The process itself sounds intriguing though.
@@SKreatywny when I say treasure I dont mean gold or silver I mean bones of kings or nobles, bones of deformed or rare creatures and rare artifacts that are rarer than gold itself.
I took social anthropology in high school, just to see if it was something I would go for.
My teacher made us watch The Gods Must Be Crazy, and then talked about it for two weeks.
I hated it so much that I immediately switched to Ancient Studies where there was more of a focus on ancient engineering, which, as it turns out, is my true historical passion. How was it made, why did they develop tools and machinery this way, and not a different way.
Hiro of Greece was my main subject in that class. I loved his aesthetic style in his inventions.
I never pursued any historical courses after high school, however. Maybe I should. Thanks, Skall! I hate the staring at pottery bits part, so, archaeology might not be for me, but something a bit more specialized like ancient engineering could be. I know it's a branch off of archaeology, so I'd still have to spend the time studying the pottery shards. A means to an end!
skall making a random video about whatsoever and everyone just watches and has banter in the comments. cheers skall
the music at the end of your videos is pretty chill
Skallagrim, I understand and appreciate that you are a very analytic person. However, I don't agree with the statement you make in the start of the video. Not every decisions needs to be analysed to death. My decisions to study physics was not based on hours and hours of research. I just liked physics. I fully agree that it is good to think things through, but dont overthink it.
I am not criticizing or arguing with you, I just wanted to point it out. Not sure why.
Great video, I wish there were more videos on youtube of people describing there experience of undergraduate majors. I did something similar by going from Biology to Biological Anthropology, and I think if I stumbled on a video like this for Biology it would have helped me switch earlier.
just left my 3 year Archaeology bachelor degree 2 and a half years in, mainly because I feel the field has found the majority of what it can find, and is now attempting to try and study contemporary artefacts (Which to me just seems completely ridiculous).
this is coming from an Australian archaeology piont of view.
Hello Skall, I study archaeology on Warsaw University in Poland, I'm on my second year now and I can tell, that what you say isn't wrong at all but depends on the place where you study. Like I said, I'm on my second year and last summer I had 2 months of practical work on site. The first site was on Mazury near the city of Olsztyn and second site was in small village near Cracow and it was Celtic and German site. The work is pretty hard and you need a lot of stamina, but it's crazy satisfying for a student like me, when you find a really cool stuff. :D
I have no idea if you´re going to see this one day(it´s been 7 years since this comment), but im considering going to Warsaw University and study archaeology there. If you have any tips about it, i would love to hear from you.
Interesting. I was actually thinking about pursuing a degree in history, and briefly thought about archeology, but decided it probably wasn't for me.
I'm still debating over whether I should major in history; I honestly have no clue what type of jobs are available for this field, aside from teaching (which I am most definitely not doing). Thought about majoring in software programming or engineering, but I hate math.
Are you any good at public speaking, giving lectures, that sort of thing? If so, keep studying history as well as writing, video editing and communications and start a youtube channel.
I hate math and i'm one of the best in my computer science course ... trust me computers are a lot more than just maths and you will learn fast all aspects of maths you need ... plus you always have google to help you
Some math helps. Especially algebra because, hey, computer programs are using a subset of it at the end of the day.
People generally don't hate math, just how it is taught or the long hours of practice needed to be proficient with manual calculation. I prefer to write a program to solve a math problem than to do it manually - or use one.
In the past, people doing manual calculation were called computers. :)
Likewise writing and understanding proofs - it's tedious, but quite useful even in programming. At the end of the day, good design (say, by contract) is very similar to writing lemmas. Just perhaps less formalized.
One thing myself and certain people are allergic to is redundancy and random incompatible notations used in math. Also parallel concepts meaning the same thing but from another branch of mathematics. And the lot of weird niche words they use.
I enjoyed Archaeology quite a bit, but I was lucky in that I got into a program in France in the 90s where you learned theory and site work at the same time. Still wasn't the digging up of Wisby that I wanted it to be though, lol.
I eventually switched to a bachelors in medieval studies because pottery is all good and well, but Archaeologists don't find battle sites, either highly educated land surveyors or very lucky metal-detectorists do.
Thanks I was gonna go into Archaelogy just for the ancient aliens part.
I'm actually doing a double major in Anthropology and biology. Anthro is my passion major and I have the bio one so it can reinforce the Anthro major.
Very interesting to know that you were also interested in these subjects as well Skall!
This video made me more excited to join rather than discouraged
As a lad before knowing any better I'd go digging with my small fork and trowel and uncover all manner of interesting finds from the industrial era to celtic and Roman finds (of course not near any historical sites), it was super fun and it's all I ever wanted to do, but of course that came to an end once I looked into study, although I still metal detect because well coins and such are better found than unfound.
Of course rummaging around with no set plan is stabbing in the dark, this is why we have all the methods and ways of doing things in archaeology (so we don't fuck it up amongst many reasons), but really it can for many kill all the fun in it, it did with me.
I think many of the Sciences have become boring and dull and wrapped up in Scientific bureaucracy and this discourages more getting involved, really surely there are more interesting and efficient ways of doing things than we currently have come up with, but strangely change is often unwelcome, even when the Scientific process calls for continuous observation, re-evaluation and testing new methods...
My father is archaeologist in medieval castle. Yes it is mostly pottery shards. And other ceramics. In our case there are a lot of ceramic tiles of fireplaces and ceramic pipes. Actually in 99% cases peaces of them. Once we found full box (8 or 10 pieces) of WW2 artillery rounds. Had to call sappers. I don't know if you are right about practical stuff. Archaeology is moving a lot of dirt around. You don't have to have degree for that. We had students from international programs come to help. Some times my brothers and I had to help to cleanup the dig for documenting (I forgot how it is called when artist comes and draws up the dig site). Maybe depends on dig and historic period.
I even found medieval belt buckle once on site.
Best to just be an armchair archaeologist, like me. I get my excitement from watching digs on tv (and on youtube). I do a bit of surface hunting for points and sherds, and have been to a few digs, years ago. But I have to eat, so I have a real job, digging was a hobby. My grandfather and uncles were what today is described as grave robbers. They dug into the mounds around here for pots. Back then it wasn't thought to be a bad thing. Times change! BTW, grandfather was cherokee.
I graduated just this last December with a BA in Archaeology from a particular University in Burnaby. What you said at roughly @5:05 in the video is quite true, as is most of of everything else in the rest of the video.
However, I'd like to share my opinion that the dry boring theory that frustrated you really IS the juicy practical methodology that helps form your perspectives (of the past and present) and praxis-based theoretical frameworks that enable one to make conclusions as to how things may have been in the distant past.
Cultural Anthropology is very similar indeed, except generally (I feel that) you're talking about people who are alive today or were alive in the very near past such that they were involved in some kind of ethnographic endeavour. I went on a field school last summer as part of my Archaeology degree and the real hands-on experience excavating a site was tremendous not only for my desire and CV to work in the field but also to stay interested in archaeology for the future.
You never know, you could always go back to school to either audit interesting courses or even to get a certificate or degree!
it's good that you speak about this discipline, i am myself in archaelogy, but in my university(geneva,Switzerland) the learning-practice in field is important at the same point than theory, i spend like all my summers on field with my shovel, pickaxe and other stuff, it was awesome, and i keep going for the moment. If i haven't did all this practice stuff, i think my exprience of arhceology would be less fun
In college, I took an elective introductory course in anthropology. I loved the course, but had to study a lot just to get a B+. It was very interesting, but I'll stick to engineering.
SKAAAALLL! I am a history major and I think you would really enjoy a History degree! With written word it is easier to learn about how people lived in the past and have books to help you remember/consult. This of course would also mesh really well with your historical weaponry interest would provide a good way to keep your historical bearings!
Bwa-Ha-Ha-Ha!!!!! THE BRUTAL TRUTH: Archaeology = "See that garbage can of flint chips over there? Count them and sort them by type of flint."; Cultural Anthropology = "Oh, when they braid their hair in TWO braids means they aren't married and you can......"
Seriously though, I took a degree in Anthropology over 45 years ago and I never once worked as an "Anthropologist". During my working career, I have been an Air Force Officer, a machinist, a police officer, a roofer, a fire investigator and worked (deeply) in a minority community. Did the degree help me? Without a doubt: there is no difference in methodology between looking at a bunch of pot shards and trying to envision how they fit together and looking at an old forge hammer, looking for the same thing. The only difference between a fire scene and an archaeology dig is that mine were still dripping. The signs are the same, things collapse in the same way, etc. (Granted, my bodies were a lot fresher, but we won't go there.) Cultural teaches that different is just, well, different, neither better nor worse, but different. When someone not like you calls you a name suggesting you have an Oedipal complex, it's a figure of speech and not to be taken personally (usually). Likewise, you learn that people are people no matter what their nationality or religion is - I was often tasked with taking a group of Arabs, Palestinians, Iranians - all these people who are supposed to hate me because of my nationality out to the South 40 of an air base without fearing for my own safety.
You also learn how to do research and write a coherent sentence. Many, many of them, in truth. My choice of headgear, by the way, is a battered old boonie cap, not a Fedora. Never could find one that I liked.
Thanks for a good video and a great channel.
So, Skall, tell me how many 'I thought this was a sword channel' comments you've found? :P
I was studying Archaeology and switched to History. The travel thing killed it for me. I don't want to constantly be running across the country. I hate travel.
Yeah, I totally understand that.
Well, at least software development is an actually marketable skill. History has much more limited uses.I'm saying that as a former English/Japanese major.
Jarrod Ongchangco I don't mind travelling if I am going someplace interesting. However, I hate spending hours on the road just to get to work, and sleeping in 2 star motels.
Just finished my second field internship, man, you speak the truth!!! Pay is shit, the hours are long and the work can be tedious, (sorting pottery and "sex rocks" ) but it if you like what you are doing it can be awesome.
Something that as always impressed me is how they reconstruct skulls from a million of tiny pieces of bones. Not sure if it's the archaeologists who do that though.
That would be more of a job for an anthropologist if I'm not mistaken.
If this had been about chemical engineering and published 14 years ago I would had been so grateful. Really a good thing to publish, even though it didn't help me.
I was going to do archaeology until my professor told me much of it was volunteer work. Changed to psychology lol
Lucky that i have a pretty good memory as well as geographical understanding. And I did also did four weeks of excavations (two weeks prehistoric and two weeks roman provinces at the Limes)
It would be so amazing to have detailed info about any culture from 20k+ years ago. What they called themselves, how their families were structured, how they dealt with their neighbors, how their government worked, what their clothes looked like, etc. We get so little from the traces that last that long.
The issue of finding a job in said field is the same for just about any scientific field these days. The job market is so limited and the number of applicants so larger that it is really just luck if you find a job in your field. That's why I'm a welder by training and a amateur paleontologist by hobby.
Robert M. Dunn
Private sector with Chem degrees is one thing. Academic positions with degrees like Paleontology, archaeology, and anthropology is difficult. Don't get me started on historians.
And getting those positions takes a lot of politicking.
Was thinking about doing Archaeology/Anthropology in Mexico. Always been interested in the Aztec and in Mesoamerica. Kinda hope there is more to it than just studying pottery.
Hi Fozzy,I am thinking about the same thing. Did you do it at last ?
This is the kind of thing that should exist for different "career/education fields" you are supposed be able to select as a kid (or even as a near 40 year old thinking about what do I want to do when I grow up).
Even though I've never been interested in archeology I had an idea on the pattern recognizing that is involved in separating a rock from a 3000 year old coffee mug broken into 1000 pieces, but I had not thought about the memory you actually need behind that.
Even though in Finland education/career choice is not that critical as education is cheap/free and changing your route is relatively simple (if your are ready to work for it).
These kinds of video form insights to different fields/jobs would really be good to have. A few minute videos from people both graduated, not graduated and on the job should at least advise on the choice a lot better than any text or any aptitude tests that I guess are still used somewhere.
The Dirty Jobs series with Mike Rowe did a huge thing in this: "These are the crappies parts of these jobs, but these people have what it takes to do them, they enjoy the jobs and because of that they usually make a good living and are happy".
I have a somewhat ... inverted experience that eventually lead to the same conclusion. It started with the digs - I went on many digs all summers since mid-highschool to late university years, befriended the people and the field (ha!), went to so many lectures that archaeology ended up my Minor. (Btw, I also have the kind of memory that deals well with broad strokes, but I literally cannot memorize numbers. Or recite names with certainty.) I loved the hands-on, down-in-dirt aspect (no amount of classroom study can give you the "feel of past" like slowly shoveling through the ground until those layers of past form a simple display, or scooping sand away from an old skeleton with a spoon); at some point I tried to take it to the next level and supervise a little trench of my own, with all the cataloguing and report-writing that came with that. And that's the part that requires factual memory, and also bureaucratic focus, and where I recognized I wasn't the right kind of person to carry those responsibilities. [the end]
So close to 700,000!
You know, as someone with multiple archeologists in the group of "close friends" and family (as well as an historian), each with different specializations, this is intriguing to me. One studied in Uppsala (Sweden), his thesis was on vendel period migration patterns (if I remember correctly), one studied in São Paulo (Brazil) and worked on mesoamerican cultures such as the Olmec, Maya and Aztec (and he is currently in Guatemala on a dig) and one specialized in egyptian pictographs (not sure this is how it is correctly written) and religion in one of the many dynasties there, and she spends half her time there. Funnily enough, only one of the three is actually working in the field.
I do not suppose it is too personal a question to ask if you would have a specific culture in the world you would rather study, had you kept up with archeology?
EDIT: If you could choose, I mean, not being limited by geography...
Hey Random2! Do you mean those friends of yours did their master/phD in Egypt/Brasil etc.. or did they just start studying there since undergraduate level? I am asking as I am interested in studying archaeology too at uni and now I am really uncertain ... I really like egyptology and I don't know whether I should just start my undergraduate in Cairo university or I should do the undergraduate in the UK where they have overall better facilities and the program looks more science-based and focused on recent innovations in the field. Thank you for your answer,I really need advice now!
I'm confused between choosing Archeology or Anthropology for my Master's degree. Thanks for your clarification. It's helping me in deciding better. I'm more inclined towards studying different cultures and diversity and how interestingly different yet similar different cultures are. I think I should choose anthropology.
I had a similar experience with archaeology, but I didn't even get to stare at sherds (there was only one practical unit). And I wasn't that interested in prehistoric Australia and Asia-Pacific.
Hey Skall. In Poland we start our studies with a monthly practice. We have it every summer holidays, so I think starting archeology in Poland is more interesting than in Germany.
I want to study archaeology, but I'm afraid I'm not going to get enough points in maths.
My mother had the EXACT same feedback about her experience studying Archaeology... she dropped it because she sat in her University in Copenhagen, Denmark and stared at pottery shards for eternities ><
Seems archaeology in Scandinavia is a little bit dry, and if not dry then muddy, smelly, and unclear. Fascinating, but with a lot of mostly-boring parts for some people.
"Ritual Sacrifice" seems to be the go-to term Archaeologists use when they aren't sure what an item is or what an area was used for, that's the thing that bugs me watching those shows.
I think they just say that because it sounds much more dramatic than the dozens of other possible explanations.
For an moveable objects it's basically "ritual purpose"
I do lament that most professions aren't about what they say they are about. One of the hardest parts about growing up is when your dreams as a child are crushed by the cruel reality of the work they entail. Archaeology isn't about dinosaurs and exploration, as much as it is the world's hardest hidden object game, but no reference list for what you are looking for. Personal story time:
Essential tremors is one of my greatest banes. I have very shaky hands/limbs/general demeanor, which means that for any task I perform there is a very large volume of imprecision. You wouldn't think that shaky hands is that big of a deal, but the crushing reality is that nearly every job requires a great deal of specialized precision. I learned this the hard way about a half-dozen times.
I wanted to be a civil engineer first. Except that most of civil engineering is making small, precise models and seeing how they handle proportional stresses. But, I can't make models, because my hands shake too much. So everything falls apart and I can't pass the classes. Civil Engineering is mostly about building miniatures, and arguing with people about why your miniature is better. The job is, like, 50% arguing.
Graphical Design was my second option. I thought "If I'm using computers, I can just adjust any mistakes I make later". Except that a large portion of designing is storyboarding everything out by hand, and I cannot draw accurately. Again, I can't pass the classes. They don't teach you to draw, they just expect you to be able to do so. But hey, if you can already draw, then you should get into computer design, because its basically drawing. Also, being a night owl helps, because realistic deadlines aren't a thing here.
Electrical Engineers make a lot of money. Problem is, most of electrical engineering is working with incredibly small and frail parts at high temperatures. I can't solder, and I have the burn scars on my fingers to prove it. In that class, I lagged behind hard, because I couldn't pass the basic "solder these wire joints together". It was so bad, that well-doing classmates tried to give me their joints, saying "Just cheat, man. This is painful". Working with electronics is basically water colors with a 400 degree pen. Every time you fail to color inside the lines, it costs a lot of money. I also hope you're physically fit, because you'll spend most of your day crawling through tight spaces at non-safe altitudes.
At this point, I realized that I can't do most careers, because they all entail the same thing. Want to be a chef? The difference between some cayenne pepper and 3 times as much cayenne pepper is the most minuscule of wrist motions. Also, a chef spends most of their day yelling at people to do things. I definitely can't be a musician, since the average space between guitar strings is smaller than the high end variance in my tremors. Doctor? Poor handwriting and poor skills with a scalpel will end up murdering people. Policeman? I'd break all the evidence and I can't shoot straight to save a life, literally. Most police work is filling out forms, and my handwriting is illegible. Health and fitness? I can't "lift" or even "move" properly, and I injure myself nearly every time I physically exert myself. Though weights resit movement, my wrists/shoulders/knees don't.
Natural Sciences. At college now. This should be fun! Sociology is really psychology. Psychology is really biology. Biology is really chemistry. Chemistry is really physics. Physics is really math. Math is really logic. Logic is really philosophy. Philosophy is really language. Language is really Sociology. Social Sciences are really politics. Pick the one you want to learn, then move left one to get the actual major you should have. No matter what you pick, though, it all boils down to one subject: creativity. Because even in Chemistry, the most solid and practical of sciences, you have to develop a thesis and defend it if you want a degree. Hope you get an idea by the time you get there. If you happen to be a particularly unimaginative fellow, then that means you can't learn science. Because college isn't designed for practical application. College is a place for philosophizing. AKA, arguing. I, of course, am an unimaginative person who would be content to stare at a wall if stimuli weren't easily available everywhere.
But, at the end of the day, I'm stuck with mathematics. Both because I show an aptitude for it (though really everyone else is just utterly terrible), and also because poor handwriting isn't an issue for waxing philosophic. Most people change their careers frequently, because only the most gifted and ideologically driven can aim for a dream job and not be discouraged when the real work is nothing like what you had imagined.
cultural anthropology lol... lucky you made it on you tube.
It actually offers better job opportunities than archaeology, more flexibility. I even did a consumer insight study once (the company was looking specifically for cultural anthropologists to gather qualitative data).
Last I checked, anthropology in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway requires some of the highest grade-point-average to get accepted into :O
I wonder, though: How do anthropologists studying tribal peoples live with themselves knowing they let their very subjects remain in such a backward state? I'd sooner go forth and advance their society. They'd join the 21st century kicking and screaming on my watch. There's no reason why anyone should still live like a savage hunter-gatherer and cling to religious beliefs which shouldn't have survived a grade school education in 2017 or ever.
As for me, I'm more of a paleontology, evolutionary biology, and astronomy guy. If you have kids and one or more of them has an interest in paleontology, heed my advice: DO NOT LET THEM WATCH JURASSIC PARK, THE LAND BEFORE TIME, ICE AGE, OR ANY OTHER MOVIE WITH PALEOFAUNA IN IT. Don't let your kids watch those movies unless you want to show them how NOT to make these kinds of movies. Hell, even the Beeb's Walking With... series of documentaries is guilty of a bunch of errors. And Jurassic World? Oh boy. Steven Spielberg and everyone else involved in making that movie had 22 years to get the science right and they still fucked it all up! How? Let me count the ways (Keep in mind that my main experience is with the first JP movie):
1. Digging for fossils. Real paleontologists do not look like they just got a shower after a hard day's work of excavating a dig site. They look dirty as hell, almost like they've seen heavy combat but without the bullets and bombs. You can forget about dino nose-picking, too; fossil vertebrates' remains are encased in hard rock. It's soft rock on the Mohs scale, being sedimentary, but still too hard to just brush away and reveal something. It can take months just to find a protruding bone. Once the remains are uncovered, they have to be carefully chiseled, jackhammered, or even exploded out of the surrounding rock.
2. Cloning the dead critters back to life. You don't get fresh dinosaur blood (nor the blood out of any other long-dead animal) out of a fossilized mosquito encased in amber! The DNA would also be too degraded to use, and the eggshells they used in the movie are impossible to make with our current technology. You'd have better luck cloning a moa, elephant bird, mammoth, aurochs (which actually are being bred back, just not JP-style), Steller's sea cow, thylacine, Carolina parakeet, dodo, cave lion, or the American varieties of horse and cheetah! 66 million-year-old dinosaur DNA would have already degraded too much to be of any use. Even if we forgave all this, you couldn't use frog DNA to suture up the gaps in the genome, either. Frogs and dinosaurs are on opposite branches of the tetrapod family tree. WE'RE more closely related to dinosaurs than any amphibian is! The zygote wouldn't survive fertilization, and even if it did, it'd look more like some Lovecraftian horror. You'd have better luck using the DNA of today's dinosaurs: Birds. And what of the plants? How were Mesozoic PLANTS bred back? Xylem cloning? NEVER EXPLAINED!
3. Jurassic Park? More like CRETACEOUS Park! Out of the genera shown in the first movie alone, only TWO actually lived during the Jurassic Period--Dilophosaurus and Brachiosaurus--and even then at very different times. A T. rex from the Cretaceous walking alongside a Brachiosaurus from the Jurassic? I don't think so!
4. The brachiosaurs. They would not have been able to stand on their hind legs. Their bodies weren't evolved for it, and if they could, they'd cause some pretty big seismic tremors when they got back down on all fours. They wouldn't have eaten eucalyptus leaves, which would have been as toxic to them as they are to most animals today. They didn't sneeze, either; only mammals do that.
5. A Triceratops shitting out its own body weight? PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE!
6. The dilophosaurs. These Jurassic theropods did not have those neck frills, nor did they spit venom. There isn't any evidence suggesting they did, but then again, they were already badass enough without such accoutrements. They were also bigger than the one in the movie (maybe it was a juvenile), and lightly built. Had dilophosaurs lived to the late Cretaceous, they'd have been able to outrun a T. rex.
7. The T. rex. Jesus Hernandez Christ, did they fuck that one up. Real tyrannosaurs would not have shaken the ground with their footsteps. If they did, they'd make for some shitty predators. There's no evidence that they had motion-based vision, either. T. rex did, however, have huge olfactory bulbs in its skull and could thus SMELL you coming, so those kids in the Jeep should have died right then and there. They weren't scaly, either--they had FEATHERS. We can easily see this in T. rex's Asian cousins, Yutyrannus and Dilong. They didn't roar, either; we've got a fossil syrinx from a late Cretaceous bird, Vegavis iaai, which shows that their vocal tracts weren't evolved for roaring. Real non-bird dinosaurs would have sooner cooed, quacked, tweeted, or crowed like birds. Sorry, Spielberg, no roaring tyrannosaurs or dromaeosaurs ("raptors"). Try again.
8. The dromaeosaurs. The critters shown in the movie weren't of the genus Velociraptor. They were more likely Deinonychus (Utahraptor was significantly bigger, but wasn't discovered until after the first JP movie came out). Real velociraptors were no bigger than turkeys; to win a fight against a human, they'd have to take on a toddler. Like the tyrannosaurs above, dromaeosaurs also had feathers. We've found quill knobs on Velociraptor forearms and feather impressions on other dromaeosaur remains such as those of the four-winged gliding dinosaur Microraptor. "Raptors" also wouldn't have been able to work door handles without breaking their quasi-wings. Their hands did not lay prone, but were held with the palms facing each other, like someone clapping their hands. Deinonychus wasn't very bright, either; that honor goes to the more birdlike Troodon, which had the biggest ratio of brain size to body mass of any non-bird theropod.
9. The predators' behavior near humans. Real predators, past or present, would NEVER drop whatever they're doing to chase a human being, especially if they're already eating. This violates biological common sense. Think of it like this: If you're at a restaurant and just tucking into a big entree, WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU THROW IT ON THE FLOOR TO CHASE A WAITER CARRYING APPETIZERS?
10. The pteroaurs from the second and fourth movies. Real pterosaurs could not walk bipedally or perch on trees like birds. Nor is there any pterosaur species known to have had prehensile feet, so grabbing things with their hind feet is right out. Pterosaurs were quadrupeds, and very competent at walking on all fours. If you were to get a TARDIS and go back in time to the late Cretaceous, a huge Pteranodon, Hatzegopteryx, or other large pterosaur would sooner walk or gallup up to you. They were too front-heavy to walk on their hind legs like birds. You can forget about hovering pterosaurs or even riding on one, because their wing membranes, supported by that really long pinky finger, wouldn't allow it. They weren't dinosaurs, either. The clade Dinosauria encompasses the descendants of the last common ancestor of Triceratops and the house sparrow, and this definition excludes pterosaurs. Pterosaurs and dinosaurs are on opposite branches of the ornithodiran archosaur family tree.
11. Jurassic World's mosasaur. The genus shown, Tylosaurus, was only half as long as the one in the movie. Real tylosaurs got to be no bigger than 12.2 meters long; the one in the movie is twice as long and might as well have been a kaiju. FAIL!
How do you define "religious beliefs which shouldn't have survived a grade school education," exactly? I sure hope you are an Atheist. Because most religions have similar amounts of supernatural belief involved.
There is no advancement, there is no savagery, there only is. Anthropology 101
Perfect timing for this.
This was insightful, I do have a lot of patience for detailed investigations but also get excited for the "juicy stuff" . Could you explain more about your major 'Cultural Anthrology' and how its different.
I found a notched flint arrowhead while huntin' crawdads as a kid, it became a personal talisman for me. I'd take it out and look at it and wonder how old it was and what kind of life the person who made it had. I think I know what attracts people to archaeology.
I am studying sociology myself, and working multiple jobs as well. I think we are of roughly similar age, and are finding out our memories aren't as happy to just memorize things as much as they used to be :p.
I feel your pain on the pottery sherds! Im an anthro/arch major and thats like 50% of my life now!
Yeah I had a similar experience with biotechnology. It sounded so great working with deadly viruses, changes to modern scientific development and design. Then the truth was 90% of the time you are staring at glass slides of the same samples over and over, ticking boxes in paperwork. I quickly dropped out of that field.
I opted for a History degree instead of Archaeology initially due to me not liking to actually do manual labour. And I stand by that idiotic choice to this day! I'm on my way to a doctorate and couldn't be happier! (Especially because I've suffered for years first by trying Chemistry and then Industrial Engineering, so the lesson here is: Do what you love.)
I've studied history and have been unemployed ever since I finished it (2 years). Though I live in a shitty country in recession. While it was good for the knowledge I've gained, every day I wish I had done something more useful.
As a former biology major, I have to say that I'm not sure what this gentleman could so for a living in any field with an academic bent. Hope he found a fit for himself.
I really wish I could make a longer reply here. Suffice it to say that:
1. The need for all this pottery typology and other 'boring' stuff is real. You need to be able to make these kinds of comparisons. And I know it must be boring. I think it is essential to take all this stuff into consideration.
2. On the other hand, asking people to memorize these things may not be the most effective way of understanding whether a person is qualified to understand and research this kind of thing. The ability to memorize is not necessarily indicative of the ability to reason and figure things out.
The truth is I don't know whether that would be helpful, because I haven't spent the time studying and thinking about it scientifically.
PS I'm a mathematician. I got a Ph.D. Looking for a job is a pain in the arse. I am passionate about what I study, but finding a job isn't very easy. So I have experience with these kinds of issues with finding jobs.
Your Goatee is awesome. I trim mine every 2 inches--takes a lot of medieval determination to grow it that length.
Petrology (Pottery study) is not the greatest of module sections, however, some aspects of archaeology (as of 2016-2017) include GIS and mapping software and database production and many aspects of analytical softwares and systems which are utilised by all manners of organisations and businesses. One such company is Google, they use software similar to GIS. The real problem about any degree is selling yourself in the best light. I understand that the study of Archaeology is different from university to university but it's what you make of your time that counts.
Staring at pottery for hours.. So true haha ;'( :'( They did formulate job opportunities that harsh in my case :D The market is getting a lot better though. Over here at least.
Hi,what country are you talking about? I would love to study archaeology but I saw that in most countries there are not many opportunities..
For Celtic history, Ireland is a rich source. The likes of the Ulster cycle, Fenian cycle and historical cycle are taken from a lot of sources and records, some of which are accurate and some of which are purely mythos such is the norm when looking at bronze age records (people had quite the imagination back then)
the only problem maybe with this is that you may have a bit of trouble with gaelic translations and pronunciations.
Wait till you start looking at Mesoamerican finds and the presence or absence of plastered walls, pre or post Aztec.
It's an interesting field if you can get into it and understand it. Go for it if you've got the interest, but it's not like the TV shows and digs are pretty boring, tough and not that very experimental.
Experimental stuff is pretty rare in the field. Battlefield, Europe is your home.
I think you've done similar experiences to me. I also change my major from pre-historic archaeology to education for kids.
Skall could you do a bit of critical analysis on the design of Fiore dei Liberi's sword and poleaxe ideas portrayed in Fior di Battalgia? By the way, the poleaxe is also a chemical weapon
I hope I get to study and work with anthropology some day
citizengiants
Soil Monkey would just be referring to basic grunt work volunteering on digs carrying buckets of soil about and helping dig stuff while the PhD's walk about pointing at things.
In the EU there's a lot of sites, so lots of places to volunteer, but your best bet would be doing a degree.
While I would agree with you that Typology can get very tiring and you certainly are required to know a lot, not only about archaelogical finds itself but also about the various scientific methods - I would say that this broad spectrum makes it very open for specialised research(ers). Just as my preferred method: Experimental Archaeology, which very much tries to recreate aspects of the past, like certain ways of metalworking, weavery or even swordfighting with practical experiments, which in turn are often based on contemporary ethnographical comparisons.
That's also the reason I made this comment: To show that (Prehistorical) Archaelogy is more than just staring at pieces of broken pottery, it's an interdisciplinary field of study with many differnet branches to specialise in. And a very interesting one indeed :)
Pottery is useful, but I've always felt that you have to be a bit careful using it as your only dating tool because there's a bit of a circular argument going on:
Q: How do you know this site is 1500 years old?
A: Because we found this 1500 year old pottery here.
Q: Ok, so how do you know this pottery is 1500 years old?
A: Because we dug it out of this 1500 year old site.
Well, the pottery in fact gives you relative dating, since we know which style of pottery came before which. For the absolute chronological dating (the year, or at least century) we need other methods, like radiocarbon dating or dendrochronology.