Pseudoarchaeology

Double pieces that have lasted over thousands of ages to offer scholars with references to human existence during the Paleolithic period are the Woman of Willendorf figure and the Lion Man of Hohlenstein-Stadel. Each figure is condensed with amazing features, even though they are not thorough to the level of realism. The Woman of Willendorf is one of the best instances of the small ‘Venuses’ that have been uncovered meaning that her persistence was a part of a ethnic set of views about women and fertility. The Lion Man, is a more exclusive artifact that recounts to the complex figures that are recognized from other cultures within which the related mythologies that have been revealed. The Lion Man has no known mythology that is obtainable in known written history to this day. The two pieces propose the unknown about the Paleolithic era, recognizing a sagacity of religion and rituals that were part of the lives of those who lived during that era and enlightening recent scholars on some aspects of the people during that time.

Of the three theories on how the Great Pyramid was built, in descending order of acceptability, the most suitable theory is Clifford Wilson’s followed by Joseph Davidovits’ and Erich Von Däniken’s argument. Clifford Wilson’s theory is the best because he illustrates how the pyramids were built and provides the evidence to prove his theory, however; this is unlike Joseph Davidovits’ theory because Davidovits does not fully answer questions that arise concerning his theory. The three theories have similar points, but contain very different ideas on the construction of the Great Pyramid. This is obvious in Clifford Wilson’s argument where he is repeatedly disproving Von Däniken’s theory that the “gods” created the pyramids, whereas in

It is observed that the historical happenings have a great negativity on the face of the society, which is yet to be fixed. And so, the belief behind, digging up the past, is all about ‘’telling the story of human

Death by Theory, written by Adrian Praetzellis, is an engaging and informational book written in a novelistic way that engages the reader to think critically about archaeology. Compared to other forms of informational text about archaeology, Death by Theory teaches archaeological theory by telling a story that incorporates the different theories of archaeology in a realistic setting. While standard textbooks about the theory of archaeology can come off a bit dry, Death by Theory skips the standard definitions and applies this in a way that aids the reader in understanding how these theories and terms can be applied in an actual archaeological setting. This text illustrates the adventure of plucky archaeologist Dr. Hannah Green and her nephew Sean Doyle as they seek to explain an unusual archaeological site while dealing with real life archaeological struggles. The protagonists deal with an egotistical colleague of Dr. Green who sought her out as a consult on a particularly strange archaeological case. All the while dealing with cults, the media, and incompatible data.

There has recently been discoveries regarding the fates of ancient societies. These discoveries reveal that great cultures like the Mayans, ancient Mesopotamians, and the Anasazi of the American Southwest

The scientists, archeologists, and historians must use science to reveal all of the answers. If it weren't for science many mysteries would still remain about the findings at the historical sites visited in this book. Written in Bone was an enjoyable read hidden with science sprinkled on every

Schliemann’s first excavation officially began in 1971, and scholars have been debating the scientific legitimacy of his finds ever since. The rediscovery of his most famous find, Priam’s treasure, in the Pushkin Museum in 1993 reignited the debate over the legitimacy of his treasures. Scholarly opinions have ranged from Schliemann being a pathological liar who sought only to create a legacy for himself to Schliemann being a relatively skilled and honest archaeologist for his time who did not have the tools to successfully excavate such a large site. Although it is easy to assume that Schliemann’s dishonesty in his professional and personal life carried over to his archaeological career, it would severely bias our opinion of the factual works of Schliemann. Instead, we must answer three questions in order to judge the legitimacy and significance of his findings. First, did Heinrich Schliemann lie about his discoveries at Hisarlik? Second, was Heinrich Schliemann a good archaeologist? Finally, did Schliemann answer the Homeric question? By examining Schliemann’s works in the context of these questions and not the context of his life before Hisarlik, we can ignore any prejudice that comes from Schliemann’s

Indiana Jones is a renowned character in today’s media. He is portrayed as a fearless fedora-wearing archaeologist, and his goal is to collect artifacts and preserve them in museums. While the field of archaeology is exciting, and the idea of partaking in perilous adventures may seem alluring, the archaeologist was depicted in an incorrect manner. An archaeologist is someone who studies human history through the excavation of sites and the examination of artifacts. Archaeologists study the past to learn more about the lives and cultures of people before. The science of archaeology is a relatively new and quickly growing field; yet, as expected with science, numerous ethical and controversial issues have emerged.

Serpent Mound is the largest prehistoric effigy mound documented, in the world. The human- made earthwork has fascinated people for years, especially archaeologists who wanted to know who built the earthwork and when. Frederick Putnam did some of the earliest archaeological excavations and reconstructions at Serpent Mound in the 1880s (Putnam 1890). Since the 1880s, several researchers have worked at the site trying to unravel Serpent Mound’s history. Researchers have proposed two primary hypotheses that the mound was either created by Adena culture (~2,300 years ago) or Fort Ancient culture (~900 years ago) (Herrmann 2014, p. 119). The most recent work done shows strong evidence for the mound being build ~2,300 years ago by Adena people (Romain

In this week’s readings, I learned that even though the past civilizations were very advanced then what I was lead to believe. Each readings connected to each other because each reading focuses on a specific aspect in which they excelled at during their time. The New York Times “Discoveries Challenge Beliefs on Humans’ Arrival in the Americas” article by Simon Romero informs the audience of Niede Guidon’s amazing findings and analysis which caused a double take of the question: who first arrived on America? But also adding to the question of how advanced were the past civilizations? Romero’s article makes us rethink what historians think about who first stepped foot on here and its goes beyond that because not only where they were first there but they were advance civilizations which

The Egyptian pyramids have been the subject of many outlandish claims and construction theories for centuries. The Great Pyramid for example has been associated with pyramid power, curses, Atlantis, Mexican pyramids, Stonehenge, Nazca, the Bermuda Triangle, Biblical prophecy, Martian faces, advanced civilizations, space aliens, cavity resonators, and even levitation. It is not surprising that some who have proposed such theories have been dubbed "pyramidiots". This paper will attempt to give a more logical solution to the methods ancient Egyptians may have had used, and the problems they may have had, using factual information, scientific evidence and a bit of common sense.

When professor assigned us to read chapter 2 what is left? As soon I open this chapter, the title of the chapter grab my attention. The deliberation that came to my mind was this chapter is going to be related to past ancestors. Before reading main thought was rolling around my mind was how the archaeologists figure out the past history. The chapter talks about the archaeologists quickly survey the possibility of the enduring substantiation and look at the great variety of ways in which it has been preserved for us. On the main apprehension of the archeology is to study the artifacts, moveable objects which are made by humans, which provide evidence to help get answer questions about the past. Non-movable artifacts such as postholes, floors, ditches, etc. are known as feature.

Archeology has been a great discovery that has contributed to our knowledge of American history because if it wasn’t for all the physical remains of the past we wouldn’t be able to have a comprehensive understanding of the culture in previous times, or the story itself of how everything happened and became to be. All the American history we know as we do is because of all the evidences that prove the past existence, life, culture, intentions, and differences between people.

In this essay I will be considering only but one of the many questions that archaeologists analyse when researching the human past. As the title suggests, did civilization, or, a term preferably used by scholars; social complexity, arise from a conflicted band of nomadic people or from a mutual consensus among them? As well as my own thought’s, I will be discussing the ideologies of a number of professionals, both in archaeology and social anthropology, focusing mainly on the early development of the archaic Mesopotamian and Mesoamerican civilisations.

• The study of the past based on recovering and identifying artifacts and making inferences about those who left these artifacts is called Archaeology .