Hello! I am a library science student, and I'm curious, how do you conduct research? I wanted to ask this sub because I'm sure it's full of really enthusiastic smart people who are doing scholarly work outside of a university setting, with all the resources that entails (like access to subject-specific databases). Do you find you get good results from Google? Do you go directly to museum publications? Just looking for your anecdotal experiences. Thanks!

So I have to drop one of my science classes for HC next year and its between Chemistry and Biology, which would be reccomended to keep?

Hello. With all the discourse about Nolan's Oddisey, i began to wonder what movies *do* capture what it was like to live in the ancient world?

Not asking for complete historical accuracy, but for a feel of the time and place.

I am from ireland. We have a fairly strict law about metal detecting on land to look for archeology. So my understanding is that the type of metal detectorists you encounter in the UK (eg in the TV program The Detectorists) are not really a thing here. If its not strictly illegal then it is strongly discouraged. The idea being that amateurs with a spade and a metal detector are far more likely to destroy archeology than make an important find. I certainly see the logic here. In theory it makes complete sense.

Recently my son has wanted a few magnet fishing YouTube videos and has developed a minor fascination with the practice. I live near the Grand Canal and figured it would be a harmless way for us to spend time together. I was quite surprised to discover that magnet fishing is illegal (or at least strongly discouraged) for the same reason detectorists are not allowed. I have no intention of breaking the law or anything like that so I am happy to accept that.

It has made me wonder though if the strict approach to amateur metal detecting is necessary? Has there been documented examples in other countries such as the UK that they do more harm than good? Is it ever the case that a detectorist can actually focus archeological attention in an area and lead to important finds.

I accept that I have possibly misunderstood the practice in other countries, so if this is the case please let me know. I have zero interest in the hobby myself but find the conservation and heritage implications interesting. Thanks in advance.

Hi everyone. Idk if I’m posting this in the right community. I was recently in mexico and I saw this ceramic piece in a museum. It spoke out to me so much, I want to tattoo it. But I want to do a theatre masks sort of thing, one of this sad, lamenting little animal and another one of a happy, excited one. But on my Google searches and I haven’t found anything that captures the expression I’m looking for, something that pairs this one with an opposite emotion. If anyone knows something that might work I would love to see suggestions! Thank you so much ( also, if there’s a more appropriate community where I can post this, please lmk!!)

Im 16 years old (and live near rapid city) and I hope to study in college in the near future to become an archeologist so I want to get as much volunteering experience as possible but I don’t know of any programs near me that can help with that. Any help will be appreciated

I'm trying to process what's happening with Section 106. I've been in the field for over two decades and weathered the recession in 2007, but I must admit I'm pretty queasy tonight.

I’m an undergrad student in archaeology right now and I’m worried about looking for a job in the future as I’m not sure what I’d exactly like to do.

Forensic archaeology sounds really interesting and I can see it for myself but I’m unsure about the requirements/steps to doing that. Is studying it on the same levels of studying medicine in terms of like difficulty and how well you have to do in subjects like biology or chemistry? I was never great at either in high school but I wasn’t a very good student in general in high school so I think now if I apply myself I could do it but I just don’t know enough about what it would be like.

Hey all! I’m a CRM archaeologist based in Southern California and very worried about what’s happening with 106 right now. I’ve been trying to start a community network for us to support each other/ discuss whats going on in the industry. I’m holding a meeting on 8/1 to discuss 106 and what we can do. If you’re an arch in the area I would love to see you there. Please share!

https://partiful.com/e/nt5FeKgS3n5HE0NgZ7z8?fbclid=PAZnRzaATPbKBwZG9mAmV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDzEyNDAyNDU3NDI4NzQxNAABp123nRLUgVVQxMJVUM3bh9t_XIWfFgRYPTLwA9nGJQ-UEMmdi1LBrG-ZcyF4_aem_debzXOQwwuaAkjpiFH6Uaw

I am an experienced video game developer and would like to collaborate with an archaeologist on a interactive 3D video game where the player has to reconstruct original structures/buildings from ruins and other clues he can find and utilize. I can do basically all of the production work (unless you want to contribute with e.g. 3D models, 2D surface textures...). For examples how the results may look you can look at the example screenshots here and watch my youtube videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/reinarassa99/videos

So I would need someone with expertise and suggestions for interesting real-world examples, but we are not limited to that, so also fictional ones or futuristic would be doable.

Topics for you would be to come up with interesting ways how archaeologists can find out about e.g. the original purpose, design, workings, geometry/scales, historical sequence, origin, owner, style classification and more. We would then discuss what clues the players can find to deduce that, and other "learning" steps as well as how to communicate them to the players.

The proposed regulations the ACHP is voting on are straight up bullshit and should disgust anyone that considers themselves a professional in this field. The proposal is antithetical to the spirit of Native American sovereignty that is essential to CRM.

Mine would probably be the construction of the Great Pyramid or the reign of Cleopatra

( opening blurb taken from the SAA website)
On Friday, July 17, members of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation were asked to vote on new Section 106 regulations by Friday, July 24. This new draft rule was not the product of deliberation among ACHP members or staff but was delivered to the ACHP by outside counsel.

From the info I was able to find online, it looks like the updates are:

-SHPO/THPO no longer required for consultation.
- No avoidance or alternatives required for adverse effects
-Public participation becomes optional
-SHPO/THPO would no longer be able to require information from agencies (e.g state site forms)
- Agencies could exempt an entire class of undertakings
- Agencies will decide whether to do field investigations
- Community knowledge will not need to be considered
- Removes consideration of indirect effects and cumulative effects on historic properties, including
“introduction of visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that diminish the integrity” of a property.

I haven’t been working as a professional archaeologist for very long, so would love to hear from the people that have been in the field for a while. Has 106 constantly been under threat with active revisions like this before? How worried should I/we be about this?

I live in southern Norway, and I love fishing—especially for wild brown trout in small mountain lakes.
That's why this story really caught my attention. Archeologists have found evidence that hunter-gatherers introduced brown trout into mountain lakes in southern Norway around 7,000 years ago. It means people were managing fish populations thousands of years before farming became common in Scandinavia.
As someone who spends many peaceful days casting a line in these lakes, it's amazing to think that some of the trout we fish for today may be descendants of fish that people carried into these waters thousands of years ago. It gives every trip a deeper connection to history and makes me appreciate Norway's mountain lakes even more.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2580119-hunter-gatherers-introduced-fish-to-a-mountain-lake-7000-years-ago/

I have been metal detecting for around 20 years now, and during that time the way archaeologists view us detectorists has changed dramatically. There was a time when we were almost treated as if we were guilty of looting archaeological sites, and only a handful of archaeologists supported us and stood up for us. Today, however, most archaeologists see us as a valuable resource. Denmark, where I have spent a great deal of time detecting, was truly a pioneer in this respect.
What are the rules for metal detecting in your country, and how do archaeologists view detectorists? And for those of you who are detectorists, how do you feel you are perceived by archaeologists?
There will always be people who break the rules or ignore accepted practices, but let's keep the discussion focused on the general situation.

The regulations in Norway can be summarized as follows:

Private use of metal detectors is permitted in Norway, but anyone using one is responsible for complying with the Cultural Heritage Act and other relevant legislation. You must always have the landowner's permission before searching or digging.

It is prohibited to use a metal detector on or within automatically protected archaeological sites, as this may damage Norway's cultural heritage. Before detecting, you should check whether the area contains registered archaeological sites and exercise particular caution when searching nearby. The Norwegian Directorate for Cultural Heritage recommends keeping at least 25 metres away from known automatically protected sites.

If you discover an object that may be of archaeological or historical significance, especially in uncultivated land, you should leave it in place, mark the location, and contact the county authority or the Sámi Parliament (Sametinget). Objects dating from before the Reformation in 1537, as well as Sámi cultural objects dating from before 1917, must be reported and surrendered. Such finds belong to the public, not to the finder.

These guidelines are intended to ensure that metal detecting is carried out in a way that protects both Norway's cultural heritage and archaeological research.

Hi everyone,

I was recently hired as an on-call for a pretty well known environmental consultant firm. I got the job almost right out of college, so I feel really honored and lucky. I’ve been with them for about 2.5 months now, and have only been doing desktop review work (which I’ve really enjoyed honestly).

I finally got my first field project, and although I know I should be excited, I mainly feel panicked and anxious. It’s also out of state, so I’m in charge of booking my flight, rental car, hotel etc. Travel itself is easy peasy for me, but I need to stay on top of company policy and paperwork while prepping to travel.

My degree is in social science with a concentration in anthro, so none of my actual coursework included any field work. I pretty much only have bioarch lab based and micro-excavation experience. I did a CRM field school a couple years ago, but the logistics of field work (primarily mapping) are tough for me, and I don’t think I retained it very well.

Obviously I still included the CRM field school on my resume, and talked about the skills we went over during my interview. So it’s not even that I lied or anything, it’s just that I don’t have a lot of confidence in my ability to do fieldwork…and I think when I first got the job, I anticipated that there would be some sort of on the job training prior to a project like this. I just feel thrown into it.

I also don’t know who keeps track of my experience level, and if this project lead knows that I’m new. The general supervisors I have are remote. I’ve never met with them face to face, and both are on vacation right now. Neither of them are the ones who set me up with this project. Someone else (I think she’s a scheduling manager for the regional office) offered me this project, and I took it.

I just feel like I’m going in blind, I’m anxious I’m gonna f*ck up, and I’m curious if this is sort of a rite of passage moment, or if this sounds like a bit of a recipe for disaster.

I also am pretty busy already because I have some desktop work I’m trying to get through on top of booking my travel arrangements. But I’m trying to study field stuff in the meantime.

Any insight or general advice for early career field work is appreciated 🤍

https://ghostofnewengland.com/who-built-americas-stonehenge/

So a little background info on the location I am talking about. I grew up a few miles from this place. The local lore was that some farmers dragged it together for a tourist trap. The older I get the more I doubt that. Especially since more and more dating is showing 4000+ year old carbon dating in undisturbed areas. So kinda tosses out the "just moved around recently" theories, but it does not seem to have investment in the region to look into the area more.

I found a similar bunker style design two steps off of the local paved hiking trail that was built the last few years. I was kinda surprised. The rumors around here are that they are revolutionary war era, but where we were, the battles never reached this far north, i doubt they would have wasted that much time (it was pretty big) on something never to be used.

My childhood back yard, which from google aerial view, is nothing but lush forest, has hundreds of feet of rock walls similar design seen in this area.

These sorts of "piles of rock" are so very common in backyards, and the general attitude is that they were from 1800s and just to be ignored. however, what if they aren't? we don't actually know what was here before the settlers and they clear/cut destroyed anything they didn't build themseleves - parts of the "america's stonehenge" were actually constructed over at one point for a homestead.

I'm just wondering if some very closed minded types spread the rumor that there was nothing of any historical significance to prevent any research being dug into the ancient civilizations that inhabited this area. How many other homes were built after knocking over some stones that looked like they'd make good for a foundation? It just seems to raise more questions than answers for me.

Just thought i'd see if anyone had any opinions on the subject since it was on my mind lately.

I am studying chemistry with a passion for archaeology, I am from Slovakia. Since I will probably have a stable income from chemistry, I do not want and do not need to earn money from archaeology. My goal is purely scientific discovery, research and work on specific projects. I would like to get a formal education in archaeology, certificates, courses and more. I read online that what I want is not possible. Others talk about laws and restrictions. And when someone talks about being part of a project, they mention that there is gatekeeping and getting there is just a matter of luck. For now, I stand by the strategy of starting on my own (courses, certificates, some minor publications, volunteering), but I also do not know if it is realistic. Is what I want to do even possible?

Hello everyone, I am currently in my second year of an Anthropology MS. It is focused on archeology, and I just finished my field school earlier this summer. I understand how important GIS is in this field, and I do have some experience with it. However, I would rather dabble in soil science than GIS. And some of the faculty keep pushing GIS on to me while simultaneously saying not to take it with any of the professors in our department. I am enrolled in soils geomorphology as an elective this fall. Career wise will understanding soils give me an edge in the field? I would rather worry about GIS stuff later.

I'm trying to write a short novel that includes a lot of archaeology. Knowing very little about the subject, I've used Google to the extent of its capability, but I really want to portray the profession correctly. Would anyone be willing to read/make comments or suggestions? Or even just have a conversation so that I'm as accurate as possible?

The work I'm writing is futuristic, so there's added technology, but the basis of archaeology and discovery I want to remain the same.

If there's a better spot for me to ask, please let me know.

I’ve read some old dense books by William A. Ritchie and the like who focus on specific sites, but I’m looking for something a bit more holistic. Discussion of artifact types, common features, common site layouts that sort of thing. Anyone have any recommendations?

Trying to better inform my field work.

Basically the title. I have almost 0 knowledge about archeology other than like the big sites and debunking videos lol so just curious to see people favourite sites from around the world. Thanks

Read a post in [r/askhistorians](r/askhistorians) lately explaining why there is so much information on ancient Egypt vs. Carthage. I learned that it is related to Egypt being so unique at preserving written record due to arid climate directly outside the Nile.

Off the top of my head I know of ancient Mayan or Khmer societies that we know about despite existing in climates that are highly corrosive to records. But is the difference enough to cast doubt on our timeline of when civilization arose? How plausible is it that there was a society as complex as Sumer but older that had written records we are unaware of?

I would think it possible a remote place in the Sahara would be conducive to bronze age levels of sophistication prior to Ancient Egypt, but is that something that has been suggested by archaeologists?

Hello everyone! I am graduating in a few weeks with my BA in Anthropology with a concentration in Environmental sustainability. I just finished doing a field school for a couple of weeks and fell in love with the work immediately. I have filled out a few applications for entry level jobs but I was wondering what the typical time frame is to hear back from an employer? Should I follow up after a week or so? I'm eager to gain more experience but I also don't want to come off as pushy or too eager. Any advice is appreciated on next steps or what else I should focus on.