What is the difference between an archaeologist and an architect?

Answer 1

Very basically, an archaeologist digs up and studies man's past by scientific analysis of the material remains of his cultures and what he did, while an anthropologist interprets these findings to find out what he thought and believed.

They are sometimes closely linked and can be blurred, but the main difference is that one is concentrating on the physical evidence, while the other is on the interpretation of that same evidence to discover how and why they believe whatever.

Solid evidence and scientific facts are one thing which does not alter, but what can alter is the interpretation of those same facts. This can vary because of a person's ideology, their background, their own belief system , but especially new evidence/facts and/or scientific theories/ beliefs resulting in a sometimes different interpretation from the original one made.

There is both a fine line between the two disciplines and an overlap of the two, and this is where you have to be very cautious and not rely on any ideology.

For example, we have realized over the last decade that ancient man was not a crude savage Neanderthal with only stone tools living in a cave, but an intelligent, civilized, and cultured man with metal tools that corroded away ,leaving only rust flakes and depressions or indentations in burial sites.

Another example is where Manetho listed the pharoahs of ancient Egypt consecutively [to make Egypt's history more impressive to the conquering Greeks in order to preserve their culture and face] and these were the 'facts' recorded in books and taught by teachers and educators, whereas we have now found that many of the pharoahs were actually co-regents (ie ruling together [eg father/son]), with this 500 years difference meaning other often-different civilizations and rulers were now contemporaneous and that actual history was now changed. Just one problem: nothing changed. All you have to do is look at modern textbooks and compare them with older ones; they still regurgitate the same 'facts' and the interpretation of those same facts; indeed, check out the internet and you will still find the same repetition of error and accepted wisdom.

Ancient man was far, far more intelligent and advanced than we give him credit for; indeed, modern man is actually regressing both physically and mentally. That is one reason why archaeologists keep on finding cultures that are both ancient and advanced, and by 'advanced' I mean in actual and not relative terms. Take Ur of the Chaldees at the time of Abraham: did you know that it was not a heap of tents or shacks, but quite substantial houses with piped underground sewerage ? When was London sewered?

Answer 2

1.Historiography is the study of the history and methodology of the discipline of history.

2.Historiography is the study of the way history has been and is written.

Historians often ask questions about the past in order to understand the present, historians use a variety of methods to help them answer questions about what happened in the past and historians examine evidence and draw conclusions as they answer historical questions.

Methods historians use to help them answer questions about what happened in the past...

Primary Sources

• Primary source-something created by person who witnessed event - letters, diaries, eyewitness articles, videos, speeches, artifacts

Secondary Sources

• Secondary source-created after event by person who didnʼt witness it - books, paintings, media reports based on primary sources - appear after event and can provide more balanced view of event

Oral History

• Some cultures have no written records.

• Oral history-unwritten verbal accounts of events - stories, customs, songs, histories, traditions - passed from generation to generation

Archaeology, is the study of past human societies, primarily through the recovery and analysis of the material culture and environmental data which they have left behind, which includes artifacts, architecture, biofacts and cultural landscapes. To come to the truth, archeologists bury artifacts from the earth. That differs to what historians do to understand the past.

Answer 3

Archaeology is a branch of anthropology but if you want to know the diferences between the two, archaeology is the science that studies past societies, who didn't leave any writing behind and they do this through the study of objects that were left by this group. The anthropologist study the culture of different human groups, mostly groups that live right now in the present but they can study past human groups but only if they left a written record behind.

Answer 4

An archaeologist studies past human societies by analyzing artifacts and physical remains. An architect designs and plans buildings and structures for construction. While both professions may involve understanding the built environment, their focuses and methodologies differ significantly.

Answer 5

The heck I know, Im asking that question and I got now fweaking answer, so neither do u :P Take tht internet cheapsies who look at Yahoo ans and wiki ans... Internet geeks -_-

Answer 6

Archaeology is actually a branch of Anthropology. The different branches are; Biological Anthropology, Cultural Anthropology, Linguistic Anthropology, and finally Archaeology.