(Skill) Archaeology [Peer Review]

[Aladari Coolwater]

HD Approval Workshop Listing Author(s): This article was created by Eleret. I have made minor edits per the suggestions on the old peer review listing. Archaeology is the study of past cultures through the artifacts and other material evidence they have left behind. The general process of archaeology is to survey the site, carefully excavate and catalog its contents, and draw conclusions about the original culture from that evidence. Remnants of past societies may include buildings, pottery, gravesites, statues, and more fragile materials such as paper or cloth. Additionally, the context in which each artifact is found can provide important information. Archaeology is not a skill which stands alone, but requires a synthesis of knowledge and experience to be practiced successfully. Prerequisites and Related Skills History and Anthropology is needed to put any archaeological findings into context. To what culture do the artifacts belong? Is a particular set of ruined walls a former temple, a storehouse, or a tavern? Not only does knowledge of the original society help in identifying artifacts, but it also guides the experienced archaeologist in deducing the scope of a site and determining where best to dig. Observation and Investigation are paramount skills for any archaeologist, as they enable the researcher to extract information from a site. Other investigative skills, such as [[Cryptography]], can also be useful when attempting to interpret the information. However, information is only as good as its record. Drawing, Copying, and Writing are equally critical, as every archaeological finding must be documented and ultimately incorporated into a larger body of knowledge. Planning, Organization, and Leadership are essential for putting together expeditions, orchestrating the process of a site's investigation, and ensuring that all information which can be had is successfully taken away from a particular excavation. Failures in planning or organization can lead to problems as diverse as supply shortages, overlooking parts of a site, loss of context and detail during the dig process, improper care and storage of artifacts, and the inability to transport intriguing findings back to civilization. Finally, Wilderness Survival, Land Navigation, and related skills can also be quite important to an expedition, even if not directly involved in the archaeology itself. Any expedition into the wilderness will need to reach its destination and survive there -- to cope with the hazards of wild animals, inclement weather, and geography; to ensure shelter for its personnel, equipment, and supplies. It is also likely that an arcaheologist would need to forage and hunt for subsistence, there being finite limits to what a crew may carry with them. An Archaeologist's Tools Archaeology requires a diverse assortment of tools. The most obvious are those used in excavating ruins and artifacts, from knives and saws for the removal of overgrown foliage to shovels, picks, chisels, and brushes for clearing away various amounts of dirt. Other tools, such as crowbars, rope, and tweezers are also extremely useful in excavation, while hammers, nails, saws, and the like are needed for building scaffolding and platforms. Loose-woven baskets or fabric screens in frames are used to sift small items from dirt. Tools for surveying and measuring are essential for accurately recording the layout of a site and its geographical context. These include measuring lines and rods, plumb lines and plumb squares, shadow squares, reference triangles, and even compass and sextant if they can be afforded. Of equal importance with the physical tools are those needed for recording what is observed and uncovered. These may include paper, ink, charcoal, pens and brushes, straight-edges, and similar items. Whole reams of paper are used in making casts, rubbings, drawings, and transcriptions of artifacts; gypsum plaster and wax can also be used for casts. Waxes, resin, and hide glue are important for cleaning and stabilizing artifacts. Finally, supplies for safely packaging and transporting artifacts, or the equipment and knowledge by which to make such things on site, are also critical for the conclusion of the expedition. Determining Where to Look An archaeologist's investigation must begin somewhere. When available, ancient maps provide a wealth of likely destinations; essentially any historical city, town, or outpost has the potential to be a treasure trove. Ancient travelogues are also useful references, often describing at least direction and distance between locations; they may mention important landmarks. Stories and songs can also provide clues to direct an archaeologist's attention. Some can be traced back to pre-Valterrian inspirations; through careful study of different versions, along with the history of the culture they came from, a researcher might deduce likely locations for the sites referenced. Similarly, some more modern tales allude to ruins which have been rediscovered, often accidentally or in adversity. If one is lucky, tracing these tales back to their origins may lead to a guide who can take the archaeologist directly to the place in question; at other times, locating the actual site involves deduction, experience, and a measure of luck. The archaeologist must also consider how likely a prospective site is to yield informative discoveries, based upon such factors as the type of site (e.g. city or town), how well-known it is, and its proximity to a population center or well-traveled route. The more experienced the archaeologist, and the more informed they are about the culture being studied, the better their deductions will be. But unless a guide with direct experience of the area can be found, luck is always a factor in choosing and reaching a research site. The archaeological community is rife with cautionary tales about researchers who made the wrong deduction, misinterpreted a passage, failed to account for a post-Valterrian landscape change, just plain got themselves lost, or were gullible enough to be led astray by a talespinner's mischievous streak. Recognizing a Site In many situations, ancient brick and stone may have been worn down to little more than dirt mounds, lie masked beneath lush foliage, or have been buried by windblown dust and sand. This doesn't even consider sites now inundated by water, which could also have been buried in sand or colonized by coral, shellfish, and seaweed to a point where artificial structures are nearly indistinguishable from the natural surroundings. The lucky archaeologist might find a ruin with walls still standing, albeit eroded and decayed, and so have prominent signs by which to orient their dig. Without such visible evidence, the archaeologist must rely on other indications. The cues by which an archaeologist may determine the scope of a site are many, from the overt to the very subtle, and full interpretation is something which comes only with experience. Knowledge of a culture's habits and conventions is also a great aid in predicting a site's layout -- for example, if structures are always grouped in a particular pattern, or aligned in a specific orientation. Earthen mounds laid out in an organized manner can indicate a town whose buildings have eroded down into dirt heaps. Slight differences in vegetation provide clues to the positions of buried walls and filled spaces. The rates at which snow or frost melts can hint at underlying structures; even better is to examine the earth after a rainstorm, where thin dirt over a buried wall dries more quickly than deeper soil. The passage of people and animals over time can pack down looser dirt, causing the tops of walls to stand out in slight relief. The angle of light at sunrise and sunset is useful for identifying variations in level and slope, which also provide information on the underlying terrain. Even the tones made by footsteps beating on the ground can be an important diagnostic tool when scoping out a site. Placing a site in temporal context requires prior knowledge of the culture and the environment, and is another skill which hinges on experience. For example, in some situations a site might be dated fairly accurately by the decay of brick walls and the depth to which dirt has piled up over them, if one knows the general trends of erosion in the local climate. Most often, a site's precise age is deduced from the artifacts found in it and their comparison with other items known to have been made by the same culture. Styles of common tools and of ornamentation such as beads are highly useful in this regard, but pottery is perhaps the best diagnostic of all -- highly abundant, fragile enough to often break and be discarded, changing rapidly in style over time, and yet also relatively resistant to decay and erosion. This method of site dating also requires that a body of lore exist for the culture in question, in order to place a new finding in historical context. Carrying Out the Excavation Personnel Any archaeological exploration, if it's to be properly thorough, requires a great deal of labor. A small team can be adequate for small sites, and may be preferred for extreme environments or remote locations. However, small expeditions may need a great deal of time to unearth and catalog the site, adding considerably to their risk. Ideally, the expedition should have many people along to assist, whether in moving earth, sifting for small items, recording observations and copying inscriptions, carpentry, cleaning and treating recovered artifacts, and even the non-archaeological tasks of cooking, hunting or foraging if necessary, maintaining animals and supplies, guarding against predators and monsters, and any number of other support roles. Balancing the recruitment and supply of personnel, the risk of spending greater time in the field, and the completeness of a site's study is a preeminent concern for any expedition. Method of Excavation A relatively rapid method of excavation is simply to dig trial pits in various places, searching for anything noteworthy in the soil. Excavation then proceeds around and between those pits which yield results. This method is advantageous when personnel or time (or both) is limited for an expedition. However, artifacts in trial pits are more likely to be damaged -- particularly items larger than the pit itself -- and when removed from the pit are also removed from their context with respect to the larger site. A much more intensive method, but often considered superior for maintaining provenance, is parallel trenching. In this method, a long trench is dug out and any artifacts in that space documented and removed, then the next line over excavated. The spatial context of artifacts is readily preserved, large items can be more easily worked around, and the entire volume of earth is thoroughly turned over. Soil from later trenches may be folded into earlier ones, in which case this is also a relatively tidy approach to site excavation. If labor is abundant, a large area can be dug out as a single unit. In this case, soil and unwanted debris must be deposited somewhere off-site. This method is most useful for superimposed buildings, where each level of construction must be studied individually. It is also likely to be employed for large settlements, where there is potentially a great deal of material to be studied and recovered -- but again requires large numbers of personnel, a great deal of time to commit to the process, or both. Disposal of Waste Dirt, shrubbery and tree boughs, inconvenient stones, and all other manner of detritus are inevitably cleared away over the course of an excavation -- which leaves the archaeologist with the question of where to put it. Upon deciding the excavation plan, the archaeologist should make an estimate of how much material will need to be removed and what places around the site will accommodate its disposal. The ideal dumping ground will not impede excavation progress in later stages, is close by and easily accessed, and will not result in a pile which falls back towards the dig as it gets larger. Frequently, as excavation progresses, dump sites are adjusted to fit the changing layout of the work. A dumping ground serves another purpose in its site, which is to keep safe clues that may be thrown away. It is too easy to mistake a piece of clay pottery for a stone, or a woven thread for a plant root. In an effort to find these forgotten objects, archaeologists will frequently return to the dump site and sift through the debris. Documentation of Findings Documentation is paramount for an archaeologist. Once a site is excavated, it is forever changed, if not utterly demolished. There is no way to readily recover lost information. Ideally, an archaeologist records everything having to do with the site, the excavation, and all artifacts. Yet while documentation is absolutely necessary to preserve information for later study and synthesis, it is also time-consuming, and while an artifact's situational provenance is being recorded, that immediate area of the dig remains at a standstill. It is up to the archaeologist to decide what details are trivial and what are critically important, a skill which comes with experience and general familiarity with the culture being studied. Generally, individual archaeologists will also develop a system of coding and shorthand which helps reduce the time spent in notation without also omitting important information. The relative position of an artifact, and what was found around it, is something that always needs to be recorded. This is true for everything from the smallest of trinkets up to buildings and the entire site as a whole. Most expeditions will assign some sort of notation for denoting features and objects, whether a combination of letters and numbers linking objects to the buildings they are found in, a coordinate grid and numbered artifacts, or some other system entirely. This only captures the most basic of provenance, however; it is best augmented with maps and sketches of context as deemed appropriate. Many artifacts are also sketched individually as a matter of course; it is generally easier to use a visual catalog to inventory items recovered than a set of written descriptions. In addition to written and drawn records, rubbings and castings are frequently used for everything from coins to wall inscriptions. Rubbings simply involve layering paper over an inscription or relief and rubbing the surface with charcoal to capture its contours. Impressions in firm soil may be used directly as plaster or wax molds. Small artifacts are generally impressed into wax, from which plaster copies can be cast. Larger objects, including surface carvings, can be cast by wet-paper molding, in which the artifact is soaked, then layered over with strips or sheets of sodden paper which is as close to pulped as possible. The paper is beaten into crevices and contours, then usually left in place to dry. Once removed, the paper may be kept as a record in its own right, or used as a mold for plaster casts. Condition and Preservation of Artifacts in the Field Archaeology doesn't end with just finding artifacts. These objects are virtually always in some state of decay, a far cry from their original solidarity, and often need to be stabilized before even removing them from the field. Presented here are some concerns which can impact a material's condition and longevity, and some methods for addressing them. Neither list is exhaustive. Precious metals: Gold weathers well, unless alloyed with silver; silver degrades considerably over time. Tarnished silver can be cleaned by immersing it with iron in weak vinegar, and corroded silver can be cleaned by immersing in ammonia, but nothing can be done to salvage badly corroded silver. Copper scales at the surface but usually remains intact underneath, if thick enough, and can be cleaned by careful chiseling of the surface. Bronze and brass: Most bronze and brass alloys corrode in the same way copper and can be similarly cleaned. More brittle alloys can be cleaned with vinegar as long as their surfaces show no cracking. If cracked, the artifact is not sound enough to withstand any cleaning. Bronze may also develop a green rust, which can be stopped from progressing with turpentine. Iron and steel: If iron is superficially rusted, it can be cleaned with vinegar. However, in most cases nothing can be done to clean and restore iron artifacts; further decay can be prevented by soaking the item in water, baking it dry, and then coating it thoroughly with wax. Stone: In addition to general wind and water erosion, stonework is particularly susceptible to the effects of salt, whether that be salt in water or salt present in the soil and surroundings which over time has permeated the stone. Salt will cause stone to flake apart from the outside in, particularly in any non-desert environment, and a thoughtless archaeologist can easily hasten this process by moving the stone to a damper climate. The only effective recourse for removing salt is to submerge the artifact for an extended period, leaching the salt from the stone; however, not all types of stone can stand immersion in water. Stone which is very badly flaked and has little solidarity left cannot be soaked, but may be saturated with hot wax instead as both protectant and binder. Pottery: Ceramics are frequently very soft when first uncovered, and can be easily damaged in attempts to clean or even simply handle them if not first permitted to dry out. Pottery is susceptible to salt, much as stonework is, and treated the same way. Glazed pottery is much more difficult to purge of salt than unglazed, frequently taking weeks of immersion. Glazes often lose their colors over time due to oxidation, regardless of conditions. Some glazes, particularly clear ones, may decompose and turn brown; these can be scraped off to reveal the colors protected beneath. Once dried out and cleaned, pottery tends to be among the more stable of artifacts. Glass: Glass artifacts are usually stable, but prone to decomposing in humid environments. Glass is also especially at risk in underwater environments. Decomposed glass has a characteristic 'frosty' appearance, is fragile and porous, and may show surface pitting or crazing. Glass artifacts are generally soaked like pottery, and may be treated with resin to prevent further degradation; however, this process generally renders it opaque, may affect color, and can weaken the piece even beyond its original damage. Wood: Wood is most affected by rot and insects. Degraded wood which is also dry can be stabilized by coating it in hot wax. The hotter the wax, the deeper it will soak into the wood. Large objects can be painted with coatings of wax and turpentine to protect their surface. However, waterlogged wood is best kept submerged; there is no way to dry it out without causing further damage. Ivory and bone: Ivory and bone both tend to be flaky and fragile when excavated. The best practice is to dig out a block of earth around the artifact and allow it to dry for seven days or more before carefully brushing and picking away the soil. Flaking ivory can be stabilized by soaking in melted wax. For more severely rotted ivory, the entire block of earth should be saturated in hot wax, then the dirt carefully cleaned away. Hide glue can also be used to stabilize ivory, particularly if the ivory is saturated with salt, but fragile artifacts can be entirely destroyed by this treatment. Cloth and leather: In dry climates, cloth may be preserved but becomes very fragile and prone to crumbling when handled. Leather is somewhat more durable, but still highly prone to decay. In damp climates, both cloth and leather tend to rot, and little more than degraded fragments might be expected. Soaking with wax, thin resin, or oil may help prevent further decay, but these materials are generally among the most difficult to preserve. Paper and Parchment: In humid climates, paper or parchment will generally mold and rot at least as readily as cloth, and little can be recovered after any length of time. In dry climates, these materials become brittle and fragile, liable to disintegrate with any handling, and are generally difficult to preserve. Pliability can be somewhat restored by covering the paper overnight with a slightly damp cloth to rehydrate it, then blotting moisture back out to a normal level. Large scrolls may need to be cut into pieces for this treatment. Considerations in Different Environments Dangers posed by wild animals, monsters, antagonistic races, and simple subsistance away from civilization go without saying; any traveler in any region can expect to be met with those. Each region also poses its own unique challenges to archaeological endeavors in particular, whether due to terrain, environment, the differential preservation of materials, or the availability of resources. These considerations impact what an expedition might expect to find, how an excavation should be approached, and the logistics of what must be brought or left behind in order to effectively study a site. Of course, any magical or divine protection of a location or artifact may radically change circumstances. Cyphrus: Between the low terrain and the lack of woody vegetation in the Sea, sites in Cyphrus are generally very exposed and suffer considerably from the effects of wind erosion, water erosion, freeze-thaw cycling, and sunbleaching. Brick, stone, iron, copper, bronze, and any exposed artwork are likely to be strongly affected by these processes. However, the flatness of the terrain makes it relatively easy to spot ruins if standing walls still remain -- and if an expedition can successfully navigate the trackless Sea to them in the first place. Note that the scarcity of wood also impacts an expedition's ability to construct scaffolds, crates, replacement handles for tools, and any number of other items on-site. Eyktol: The deserts of Eyktol are some of the few environments where organic materials are likely to persist in salvageable, albeit highly desiccated and fragile, condition; even paper, parchment, and textiles can be found preserved by the desert, if an archaeologist is fortunate. Salt and windblown sand are the major eroding elements in Eyktol, degrading stone, brick, and anything else left exposed. In more sandy desert regions, dunes might over time completely bury a site, which can help protect it from erosion but conversely makes it much more difficult to find. As with Cyphrus, wood is scarce throughout the desert, which severely hampers the operations of any archaeological expedition. In addition, water is a highly limited or even unavailable resource, affecting excavation and artifact processing methods as well as the survival of personnel. Falyndar: The humid environment of Falyndar promotes rapid decay of all organic materials, from textiles to leather to wood; only those maintained in a sheltered, dry context out of contact with soil are likely to endure. Stone is more persistent, though highly prone to water erosion and damage from the roots of vines or other clinging plants. The abundant moisture also thoroughly corrodes glass and reactive metals, and over time can soften and wear away pottery. Wood and water are at least plentiful, but the dense growth makes it very difficult to bring anything to or from a research site. Kalea: The high peaks of Kalea can provide an arid, cold environment which helps preserve artifacts. Although rain and snow are prevalent throughout the mountains, water damage is slowed by cooler temperatures. On the other hand, strong winds, rain, and extremes of temperature can do considerable damage, as can repeated freezing and thawing. Artifacts in caves and other sheltered locales are more likely to persist in good condition. Moving anything, be it resources in or discoveries out, is made extremely difficult by the mountains. Sylira: The relatively balanced climate found throughout most of Sylira promotes gradual deterioration of materials. Fragments of organic and other sensitive materials are likely to persist, though still prone to degradation. Overgrowth is common in forested areas, and root growth can damage brick and stone, though not as rapidly as occurs in Falyndar. Southern Sylira features a monsoonal climate, with all the disadvantages of high humidity and water exposure but only for part of the year. Taldera: The deep cold of northern Taldera helps preserve artifacts; however, accumulated snow and ice has generally buried sites in this region, placing them beyond the ready access or even identification of researchers. Expeditions to northern Taldera would also be severely hampered by lack of on-site resources. Southern Taldera is less cold and more humid, more hospitable but also more damaging to artifacts, in much the same fashion as Sylira's climate. Submerged Areas: Regardless of whether water is fresh or salt, it is not a kind environment to artifacts. Fragile organic materials (e.g. cloth, parchment) will generally have degraded completely, while sturdier organics (e.g. wood) are likely to be severely deteriorated. Pottery, brick, glass, and iron are also particularly susceptible to water damage. Artifacts which have been submerged often deteriorate rapidly upon removal if not handled with special care. The single greatest difficulty with underwater archaeology is finding a site, followed by getting researchers to it. Another problem is the changeable nature of aquatic environments; currents, storms, and tides all exert considerable force, and can greatly scatter items as time progresses. Sites can be buried or exposed by these influences, and accessibility may depend upon the time of year. Shellfish and weeds may also have thoroughly colonized surfaces. Urban Areas: Archaeological studies may also be conducted within populated cities, examining antique buildings or layers of past occupation. In such a case, the researcher has the advantage of the city's resources close to hand, and needs much less advance planning regarding supplies or labor. However, urban sites do not often survive unaffected by the people who live in and around them. Over the centuries, any artifacts which remained in urban areas have likely been picked over by opportunists and scavengers, with anything remotely useful or valuable removed. Historical structures may be repurposed, with as little change as a new coat of whitewash or as much as a complete restructuring of their interiors. They may be torn down in whole or in part to provide building materials, or to clear land for new construction. Lower floors and basements may be filled in to provide foundations for new buildings; these can be among the best of urban sites, however, as artifacts buried in the fill are likely to have gone undisturbed. For buildings which remain standing, the architecture itself and any surviving ornamentation are often the most informative items an urban archaeologist can expect to find. Even this is important, however, as the structure alone may provide information on such things as construction methods, use patterns, and art styles. Analyzing Findings Although a dig is a large part of archaeology, the analysis must too be considered. Once items of interest have been found, they are typically taken back to another, safer location for examination. There, archaeologists not only identify what the item is, but how it might relate to the culture under investigation. Finds and their potential importance may be as follows. Organic Remains: Organic remains are one of the most common finds of an archaeologist's investigation, and are indeed one of the most useful. Large concentrations of plant remains, such as fossilized seeds or roots, can indicate how and what they farmed. Animal remains that differ from local animals may show domestication, while modified animal remains such as bones for divination or pelts for clothing may indicate a religious worship. Shells show that a location was previously underwater, while forest animal remains may show that a now-grassland used to be heavily wooded. Even preserved feces can be important for analyzing diet. If a large amount is found in a concentrated area, the age of the varying feces may tell how large of a population lived there, or how long. Inorganic Remains: Artifacts come from many different sources, and often those sources are not biological. Clues such as road construction may prove trade routes and methods of travel. The condition of structures such as buildings or homes may indicate how the civilization fell, be it natural disaster, raiding, or a simple collapse of order. Tools are a large part of inorganic remains. What they have been crafted from may show how advanced the civilization's technology was, and how much emphasis the civilization placed on the advancement. They can even indicate whether or not the civilization built or overtook their residency, judging by how well the tools match the level of craftsmanship in the structures. Hoards: Hoards, though rare, are one of the most fascinating finds for their high concentration of artifacts. Hoards are a group of artifacts intentionally preserved, usually for later retrieval. Hoards often contain currency, treasures, or war trophies. These can indicate the religion of a locale, or a history of martial war and their attitude towards the war. Depending on what is found, it also will tell an archaeologist what the society valued, and what kind of objects they used for currency, be it coin or trade goods. In fact, the very presence of a hoard is a clue, revealing turmoil in the society that led a person to hide their prized possessions. This could be political, martial, or even spiritual upset, and can only be determined by further investigation. Skill Progression Novice (1-25) The novice archaeologist spends at least as much time with books as in the field. They are still learning the existing body of work, if any, around their subject culture, as well as the basic principles of archaeology. In a group expedition, novices will often be tasked with cataloging and packing artifacts, making copies of texts and images, and drawing maps or diagrams. When excavating, a novice will generally be supervised by a more experienced mentor to keep records and prevent serious damage to artifacts if possible. If left to keep their own records, novices generally either document too little, losing information, or too much, producing a morass of details which is later difficult to wade through. Only artifacts which are innately stable are likely to be preserved in a novice's hands. Competent (26-50) A competent archaeologist has achieved working familiarity with their culture of study, recognizing common features and possessing a general sense of their history. They can recognize more obvious sites, having trained their eye to pick out manmade rubble from more natural surroundings. They are familiar with basic cataloging and notation techniques, but often miss elements of provenance, and have difficulty determining what to record for unusual artifacts. Competent archaeologists understand the principles of excavation, but are often too eager to make great finds and plow through more subtle or fragile items. At this level, the archaeologist is still learning techniques for the preservation and handling of artifacts. Expert (51-75) An expert archaeologist has a solid background in the culture they study, and may have started branching out into others as well. They have learned to distinguish moderately subtle site indicators, such as differences in vegetative cover and mound shapes. Experts generally have a preferred method of cataloging and notation which serves most purposes, but is still open to improvement. An expert is familiar with methods for handling many artifact types, and can make a best guess at how to treat material they haven't handled before. Experts also have some success at adapting to unusual research environments. Master (76-100) The master archaeologist is intimately familiar with the artefactual record of the culture they study, and may have solid knowledge of other cultures as well. They have a keen ability to discern a site's features and extent, utilizing even subtle indicators of light, texture, and sound. At this level, the archaeologist has fully refined methods of cataloging and notation so that few to no details of provenance are lost. A master is highly capable in the preservation of artifacts, and can handle even the most delicate or unusual of items with good chance of success. This includes heavily protected magical artifacts, though even a master is wise to handle those with care. Finally, master archaeologists can readily adapt their techniques to suit extreme environments and locations if needed.

[Vellichor]

Reading through the article, I didn't find many grammar errors but there was one section in Recognising a Site that tripped me up. “The passage of people and animals over time can pack down looser fill dirt” Pack down looser fill dirt? If that is a technical term, ignore me. I know sifting dirt is mentioned once in the tools section, but I think it would be good to mention it again in the disposal of waste section. It is common practice for archaeologists to go back and sift through the earth and rubble they displaced. Don't ask me how I know. Also, I wondered if there should be another section. One that talks about what kind of information could be recovered from the site. If the site shows signs of having been heavily burned, for example, an archaeologist can come up with theories of fire and invasion. Daily artefacts left behind in homes or discarded weapons can provide further insight. If the buildings are heavily damaged and crumbled but other artefacts are well preserved, the area might have been hit by an earthquake or large storm. Basically a section that explains what information can be found and deduced. We could leave it up to the reader, but a few examples could help. Also, dispersed materials like coins or pottery might explain trade relations. Documents and engravings recovered will tell a lot about the region and the political atmosphere of the time. And in order to make sense of them, the archaeologist will need to be a sort of linguist/cryptographer. So that might be added into the requirements/related skills. Loved the ‘Condition and Preservation of Artefacts in the Field’ section. If you need any help I'll be happy to give some insight. Thanks for taking this up.

[Aladari Coolwater]

All issues have been addressed, save for the extra section. I will get that drafted and added shortly

change log :

- Removed the word "fill" in "looser fill dirt". Not sure what was trying to be expressed there.
- Added paragraph on sifting through dirt to the dump site section.
- Added Cryptography to related skills.
- Fixed an arbitrary typo ('are' to 'is' for singular instead of plural).

[Aladari Coolwater]

An extra section has been drafted, listed here for the record. Once again, critique is welcome.

Analyzing Findings :

Analyzing Findings

Although a dig is a large part of archaeology, the analysis must too be considered. Once items of interest have been found, they are typically taken back to another, safer location for examination. There, archaeologists not only identify what the item is, but how it might relate to the culture under investigation. Examples of finds and their potential importance are as follows.

Organic Remains:
Organic remains are one of the most common finds of an archaeologist's investigation, and are indeed one of the most useful. Large concentrations of plant remains, such as fossilized seeds or roots, can indicate how and what they farmed.

Animal remains that differ from local animals may show domestication, while modified animal remains such as bones for divination or pelts for clothing may indicate a religious worship. Shells show that a location was previously underwater, while forest animal remains may show that a now-grassland used to be heavily wooded.

Even preserved feces can be important for analyzing diet. If a large amount is found in a concentrated area, the age of the varying feces may tell how large of a population lived there, or how long.

Inorganic Remains:
Artifacts come from many different sources, and often those sources are not biological. Clues such as road construction may prove trade routes and methods of travel. The condition of structures such as buildings or homes may indicate how the civilization fell, be it natural disaster, raiding, or a simple collapse of order.

Tools are a large part of inorganic remains. What they have been crafted from may show how advanced the civilization's technology was, and how much emphasis the civilization placed on the advancement. They can even indicate whether or not the civilization built or overtook their residency, judging by how well the tools match the level of craftsmanship in the structures.

Hoards:
Hoards, though rare, are one of the most fascinating finds for their high concentration of artifacts. Hoards are a group of artifacts intentionally preserved, usually for later retrieval. Hoards often contain currency, treasures, or war trophies. These can indicate the religion of a locale, or a history of martial war and their attitude towards the war. Depending on what is found, it also will tell an archaeologist what the society valued, and what kind of objects they used for currency, be it coin or trade goods.

In fact, the very presence of a hoard is a clue, revealing turmoil in the society that led a person to hide their prized possessions. This could be political, martial, or even spiritual upset, and can only be determined by further investigation.

[Prophet]

I'm just being a nuisance but should we broaden this to include paleontology?

It wouldn't require much in the way of editing aside from the introduction where you could eliminate the specifics of the concept being centered around culture. The techniques, related skills and everything else is literally same as far as application is concerned so a massive rewrite wouldn't be necessary.

Note: I didn't read either of the previous steps so forgive me if this has been covered.

I browsed through the article and nothing popped up initially as being awkward or incorrect but I wanted to address the aforementioned question before diving in with my pocket protector and Cub Scout's Handbook.

Thoughts?

[Aladari Coolwater]

I looked back and didn't see any mention of it in the other reviews, so I did a little research. The definition of Paleontology specifically excludes "modern humans", so I don't know if you meant lumping them together or just mentioning them in the same article. Lumping them would be more difficult since they're designed to be opposites, I think, but I might be over-complicating it. On another note, I think a lot of things that could be included in Paleontology are missing here. Geology is not in the related skills. Specific cases are not included; one example is in the condition and preservation section, where amber should be listed. The concepts of dating soil, interpreting fossils, and the whole thing with coal and oil remains (not totally sure what that's all about. I'm not too familiar with the concept of paleontology) are missing as well. I couldn't see paleontology having its own article, necessarily, but I also feel like it doesn't quite fit here. I don't know- are these legitimate concerns, or am I being too picky?

[Aladari Coolwater]

Bump.
Last call!