0
An archeologist explores everything.
Wiki User
∙ 7y ago
An archaeologist would most likely explore ancient ruins, burial sites, and artifacts to learn about past civilizations and cultures. They may excavate sites, analyze artifacts, and study historical records to piece together the history of a particular region or time period.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Would a historian or archaeologist most likely explore site of an ancient battle?
An archaeologist would be more likely to explore the site of an ancient battle, as their expertise lies in studying material remains to understand past events. They would excavate the site to uncover artifacts, weapons, and other evidence that could provide insights into the battle. Historians, on the other hand, would primarily rely on documented accounts and texts to analyze the battle.
Which would an archaeologist most likely study?
An archaeologist would most likely study ancient artifacts, ruins, structures, and human remains to understand the cultural and societal practices of past civilizations. They may also analyze artifacts to determine patterns of settlement, trade, religion, and technology.
Who would be most likely to study the remains of clay jars to determine what they once held?
Who would be most likely to examine the remains of clay jars to determine what they once held?
What social scientist would most likely study the artifacts from ruins?
An archaeologist would most likely study artifacts found in ruins as they are trained to uncover, analyze, and interpret material remains from past human societies.
What is the type of evidence that an archaeologist would find most useful is an?
The type of evidence that an archaeologist would find most useful is artifacts, such as tools, pottery, and weapons. These objects provide direct insights into the daily lives and activities of past cultures.
What archaeologist would most likely explore?
An archeologist explores everything.
Would a historian or archaeologist most likely explore site of an ancient battle?
An archaeologist would be more likely to explore the site of an ancient battle, as their expertise lies in studying material remains to understand past events. They would excavate the site to uncover artifacts, weapons, and other evidence that could provide insights into the battle. Historians, on the other hand, would primarily rely on documented accounts and texts to analyze the battle.
What would an archeologist most likely explore?
They would explore objects of people and places of the past.
Which social scientist would be most likely to study peking man?
Archaeologist. <3
Which individuals would historians most likely learn about artifacts from ancient cultures?
Archaeologist
Which social scientist would most likely study the artifacts from these ruins?
Archaeologist
Which would an archaeologist most likely study?
An archaeologist would most likely study ancient artifacts, ruins, structures, and human remains to understand the cultural and societal practices of past civilizations. They may also analyze artifacts to determine patterns of settlement, trade, religion, and technology.
Who would be most likely to uncover and remove a piece of bronze at an excavation?
Archaeologist hope that helped! :)
Who is most likely to determine where an ancient temple was built?
archaeologist
Who would be most likely to study the remains of clay jars to determine what they once held?
Who would be most likely to examine the remains of clay jars to determine what they once held?
What question is most likely answered by a historian but not an archaeologist?
Why a temple was built.
What social scientist would most likely study the artifacts from ruins?
An archaeologist would most likely study artifacts found in ruins as they are trained to uncover, analyze, and interpret material remains from past human societies.
