What methods do anthropologist and archaeologist use to explain prehistory?

Question

What methods do anthropologist and archaeologist use to explain prehistory?

Answer 1

The ones I know do it by consulting a Ouija board.

Answer 2

Archeology looks at artifacts left behind to try and determine aspects of material culture from what remains.  Anthropologists use these same artifacts in combination with linguistic, religious, biological and other sociological evidence to try and recreate, as well as possible, the society of the group under investigation.

Answer 3

A whole range of methods is used - many of which can now be seen on a regular basis on the CSI type television shows -

Basically - the physical evidence available is examined to see what it can provide directly.  For example -  isotopes of various elements can provide evidence of whether an individiual had a corn based diet, a seafood based diet, etc.  another example is bone which has internal structuring that responds to physical stress, allowing information about what a particular individual may have done in life to be determined (foot soldier, horse riders, sailors).  

Another tool that archaeologists use is called the Direct Historic Approach - looking at groups that were known and written about in historic times - and then following that group back into prehistory - using clues from the historic writings as a compartive basis for the archaeological record.

Another important tool is the observation of other living cultures in similar environments - seeing how they adapt and live and then looking at the archaeological record for evidence of similar activities.  This is called analogy and can be a very important tool if utilized correctly, however you have to be careful not to assume that a culture 5,000 years ago lived exactly like anyone alive today.

These are just a few of the theorectical and methodological tools that archaeologists use.  To get a better understanding takes a lot of training - to be a professional at the level of someone that actually does the interpretation of the past (not just digging it up for display) typically takes a MA/MS degree or higher (6 years of college).

Answer 4

Both goups compile as much information as they can get from artifacts, buildings & styles if any, fossilized bones, f***s, tools, weapons & garbage pits ... all valuable sources as they offer some insight into the culture. Grave sites are perhaps the most valuable in gaining some insight to the people & how they lived.

The end result of most investigations is that they get a few pieces of a large puzzle & must interpret, save & record information suggested by those pieces.  Seldom does one person discover enough information in their lifetime to decipher the entire puzzle, but they do record both solid fact &, most of the time, their opinion on "the rest of the story."

As years go by, more pieces of a puzzle are discovered & added to what is known.

Answer 5

Very questionable ones at best. The flimsy 'evidence' they exhibit would never be allowed in a Court.

Answer 6

If they can tell the age of a rock by using carbon dating, I think they can date the age of any artifacts, including animal and mineral.

Answer 7

There are many methods used to date fossils and such.  The one we usually hear about though is carbon dating because this is the one that promotes the evolutionists' agenda.