When identifying an artifact, archeologists have to rely heavily on preexisting knowledge, common senses, and each other. Exercise one displayed how the identity of an artifact and its cultural importance is not easily determined by its outward appearance. Even if the identification of the artifact is obvious, archeologists ask basic questions in order to understand the use and significances of an artifact. Often this question lead to more questions rather than answers, still the assignment showed how asking questions and gathering basic information could lead to the identification of different artifacts. Artifact number one is a manila. A manila is a copper or copper alloy bracelet that Europeans used as a form of money in the African slave trade. According to one source Africans considered copper to be equivalent to modern gold and the bracelets …show more content…
displayed their status and wealth. When first looking at this artifact, the most prominent feature was the horseshoe shape, but with further insight, the possibility of it being a horseshoe was nonexistent. After eliminating the horseshoe theory, the first basic question to arise was what was it made of? Fellow students suggested copper or a copper alloy. Furthermore, the orange tent to the artifact showed signs of rust and from exposure to water. The resemblances to a torc bracelet became clear after studying the shape of the object. Most of the torc bracelets found were elaborate, decorative, and twisted. The appearance of the artifacts gave rise to the hypotheses that it was used in trade. The search for copper trade bracelets lead to the identification of the artifacts. The classification of this objet showed that even though something might appear to be simple, asking basic question could lead to a better understanding of an artifacts use across different cultures. Unfortunately, after many hours of research the identification of the artifact is still a mystery. Although from research, a possible theory is that it could be charcoal from a fire pit. According to Encyclopedia of Quaternary Science, archaeologists use pieces of charcoal for dating a site by means of radiocarbon dating. The original theory was that this artifact was made of Flint because of the flaking on the edges of the artifact. What type of Flint was it made out of? Research led to the conclusion of obsidian. Also, fellow students seem to concur with the theory of an obsidian artifact. The shape of the artifact also pointed toward it possibly being an arrowhead or even end scraper. However, upon further investigation the artifact’s texture resembled that of charcoal. The importance of charcoal in archaeological methods led to the new theory about the artifact being charcoal. The process of trying to identify this artifact revealed that sometimes the identification of an artifact remains a mystery, but that does not mean further research should cease. The third artifact is a slave hirer badge. According to the Smithsonian, masters hired out their slaves to work in the local town and law-required slaves to wear badges for identification. Unlike the other artifacts, this one proved written information such as 1839, porter, and Charleston that aided in the identification process. At first glance, this tag looks almost like a cattle tag. Unfortunately, branding not tagging in 1839 was the preferred way to mark cattle. Nevertheless, the date 1839 did pose significance. The artifact dated back to the years before the Civil War and the emancipation of slaves. The cattle aspect along with the pre-Civil War date led to the assumption that the artifact might have to do with slavery. This line of thinking led to the identification of the slave hire badge. Even though out of all the artifacts this was the easiest to identify you had to ask basic questions to understand the history and cultural significance of the artifact. Artifact number four is a side scraper. Knapping flint or some other mineral like chert or obsidian produces Scrapers. People like Native Americans used them to make other tools, carve wood, and prepare animal hides and meat. The marks on the side indicate that flint knapping formed this artifact. However, pictures of Flint did not resemble the honey looking color of the stone. A few students mentioned honey calcite; further inquiry lead to the realization it is not practical for tools. Chert was another theory highly resembling the artifact’s color and texture. Chert deposits in the Ozark Mountains and parts of Texas led to the conclusion that the artifact belonged to Native Americans. The marks on the left side of the artifact were very similar to that of chert scrapers found in Native American archaeological sites. Even though this artifact at first glance looks like nothing more than a piece of rock that shows how important it is to investigate and analyze many of the objects found in archaeological sites. The last artifact number five is a button or cufflink made from a piece of eight coin or Spanish reel by adding a button shank to the back.
According to John T. Powell, the Spanish military and Spanish colonist used these buttons. In addition, American colonist wore these buttons as a sign of rebellion against English rule. The rust and the erosion of the artifact are smaller to that of coins found under water. Research gained from past assignments hinted toward a military button. However, most of the buttons were not flat enough to be the artifact in question. The next step in the researcher was to see if the artifact related to coin minting. Researching coins lead to the connection between the Spanish reel and the top design on the button. Even after identifying, the artifact there was more information to discover. The ca in the bottom left hand corner of the coin is the beginning of the Latin form of Charles III, which would date this coin approximately, 1759-1788. This artifact shows that an archeologist has to be careful when looking at artifacts because people often reuse the old in order to make something
new. . Artifacts are the clues to the past; they give us insight into the day-to-day lives of the people that used them. Artifacts one, three, and four once identified paint a border picture of not only the culture it belonged to, but also the culture’s history. The identity of artifact number two might be unclear, but if radiocarbon dated it could put the period of the site into perspective. Each artifact in this exercise showed that the basic information archeologist gather about it helps solve the mystery of the artifacts identity and it purpose.
To identify the specific type, functions and time period of the artifacts, various archaeology books, reports, and journal were referred. The interpretation was then conducted by dividing the artifacts into different area on the map and investigating their relationships.
The Royal Alberta Museum holds a sacred object of the First Nations groups of Alberta and Saskatchewan, the Manitou Stone. This sacred object has a vast history to the Aboriginals but also has much controversy that surrounds it. Hundreds of years ago the object was removed from its original spot and was moved back and forth across the Canada, eventually ending up in Edmonton at the Royal Alberta Museum. This sacred object was said to have many powers for the First Nations people and when it was taken it brought great hardship to the First Nations groups that believed in the power of the Manitou Stone. This is only the beginning of the issues that surround this sacred object. Many different Aboriginal groups claim to own the piece but no decision has been made as to where the object should be placed. With the Manitou Stone now in the Royal Alberta Museum issues arise about the proper housing of the item and whether or not it should be retained in a museum or if it should be on First Nations land. Where the Manitou Stone is placed brings many complications and struggles for the Aboriginal people that claim ownership of the sacred object. When researching this object I was initially unaware of the significance that a museum could have to groups of people and the struggles that this could bring to these groups. This paper will explore the significance of the stone, the various viewpoints on why the object was moved originally from Iron Creek, who claims ownership to the object, and whether or not a museum is the proper place for sacred objects like the Manitou Stone to be kept.
The art is locate more than 100 m into the cave and the artifacts were found at the cave’s opening. The artifacts were linked to the Early Woodland/early Middle Woodland to the Mississippian period. The ways that the artifacts were dated was by looking that the markings and the brushing of the ceramics. In the center of the...
. Horwitz, Tony. "Pocahontas Engraving." Smithsonian 41.7 (2013): 91-118. Academic Search Premier. Web. 21 Apr. 2014
I recently visited the American History museum and came upon the most interesting artifact in the Lighting a Revolution section within the Transportation and Technology wing of the museum. This artifact is an advertisement from Charleston, South Carolina in 1769 about the selling of “a choice cargo” of two hundred and fifty slaves.
The picture I choose for my personal artifact assignment is a picture of my old HALO-3 helmet based of the video game HALO which is a sci-fi & military science fiction first-person shooter video game. The game deals with inter- galactic warfare which also involves fictional characters to travel around in space, explore new discoveries and findings in planets. The reason why I choose this helmet as my artifact is that it relates to our coarse earth and space a lot as it merely almost looks like a future of what could be of a astronauts helmet and through the game and in the course they also show resemblance of how life is in space, different theories and the game also sheds some light on how the future of space travel may be in the years yet
If you ask the majority of citizens in the United States about their opinion on the validity of geography-based cultural heritage claims, chances are they will either look at you like you are crazy or dive into an explanation about the most recent show they saw on the history channel about the repatriation of the Kennewick Man. Like any other topic, a person’s scope of knowledge in regards to archaeology is limited to the material that they have been exposed to. In today’s society, the majority of this information is gleaned from popular media sources such as National Geographic, the History Channel, Wikipedia, and other mainstream “educational” resources. Although very popular, these resources often offer interpretations that sensationalize and misrepresent archaeological data. The media is the main conduit of educational information and therefore, has a societal obligation to accurately portray archaeological findings and data.
The three artifacts in the exhibition depicted the early days when the community was in immigration into the American boundaries, the importance that comes with these people upholding their culture despite moving into a new environment where there already exists a cultural belief and lifestyle that differ with theirs. The university museum is a modern establishment in the United States of America that historians and research analysts go to as a primary source of historical information concerning several cultures and beliefs that existed in the country in the early development days. Music on the hand is a core element in the Greek American culture and traditional beliefs that uniquely identifies this group of people. Handmade textiles as well are relevant in the exhibition because it represents the social and economic activities of that the Greek America community members were engaged in during the 1880 to 1910 period after immigration into the American soil. The textile tools were useful in their farming activities as tools for cultivation in the Northern American region; the textiles also comprised of beautiful artifacts that old men of the Greek American community had for particular traditional functions of the community. Wooden carving, for instance, was for decorations; these were sold out to members of other
These items include a piece of a rapier handle, severely rusted, and a small writing tablet, which appears to still have the letter “M” scratched on it. In other earlier discoveries, things like English pottery, pipe pieces, gun flints, lead shot, wine bottles, beads, rolled copper, and more. While some of the items were from many years later, many of them could very well point to the movement of the Roanoke residents of the 16th
As I walked to the Daly Science Center from Benson Memorial with a stomach full of ridiculously expensive cheap food, I expected the lecture of Dr. Bass to be more or less of a rehashing of what he spoke to our class about earlier in the day, albeit with a few more and older people watching. My first surprise came as I opened the door of lecture hall 206 and saw all the students sitting on the stairs. I myself was relegated to sitting at the very top of the stairs, near the door, with other students sitting on nearly every stair all the way down. As soon as I sat down I was immediately drawn into the lecture by Dr. Bass’s immense passion and visible love for his field of work. My second surprise came as I listened to his tales of various escapades and adventures along the Turkish coast. The most impressive part of his lecture was his comfort in not only lecturing on the intellectual context of his work, but also his willingness to share his personal experiences with a large group of strangers. The longer I listened to Dr. Bass speak the more honored I felt to be in the presence of a true legend of archaeology. At first I did not understand why he included the slide and story about the beach where him and his wife spent their honeymoon forty years ago. However, towards the end of the lecture when he brought us back to that same beach, I was amazed that it has come to be known as “the beach where the American’s were”. You notice I say brought “us” because that is exactly what Dr. Bass did Monday evening. He brought us as an audience with him on his trips to the Near East and down to the sea floor to look for amphoras and scarabs in shipwrecks, which before his work nobody knew existed.
This artifact is a lesson plan I designed for a second grade class teaching grammar, writing, reading comprehension, connections to art, and project presentation that demonstrates my ability to support and expand each learner’s expression in speaking, writing, and other media. The lesson begins with grammar instruction, guided practice, and individual practice, which expands the learner’s writing skills. The learner’s writing expression is also supported through guided practice during the ‘Checking for Understanding’ section of the plan and expanded through the challenge of creative writing in the ‘Independent Practice’ section. I support each learner’s speaking skills by grading each student at or slightly above his or her level during the
The artifact record keeping strategies and practices of archaeologists and excavators can be compared to modern day bookkeeping as every artifact has to be journalized and posted to some sort of a ledger as every transaction in accounting has to be analyzed, then journalized and posted to a ledger.
The philosophies of archaeology can be a source for some major confusion in the field of study. We use philosophy to explain to not only others but to ourselves about why we do what we do. In archaeological research, epistemology and ontological seem to be our core philosophies for understanding, but both have caused problems in the way of their usage. Without a clear understanding of these two philosophies, the reason for what we do falls apart and effect how we study archeology as a whole. We as student must understand these philosophies in order to better see how to perceive and understand our fields.
When your go to a museum, you look at all the amazing artifacts and wonder, do the artifacts in the museum really come from my state/country? Do the Artifact belong to my state/country? Cultural artifacts contain a presence of ones culture. The culture is in the artifact in every way and form. People are taking away the cultural side of the artifact by taking away the artifact from the place of origin. Cultural artifacts should be returned to their regions of origin. So the region can look at the artifacts and see themselves in the culture.
Subsequent to the study of different philosophies of art, as well as completing projects asking for personal preference in art as well as objective “fine art,” a personal philosophy may, by necessity, include subjective and objective facets. In determining what fine art is, the quality of universality is important. There also does not have to be a traditional presentation of beauty for a work of art to be fine art. Contrary to R. G. Collingwood’s philosophy, for fine art the culture and setting in which art is created should not matter, because if art is universal and timeless, meaning endures outside of where and when it was created. Evaluation of art can be subjective, but fine art is universally appreciated regardless of understanding background,