r/AskHistorians • u/Tiako Roman Archaeology • Jan 21 '14
AMA AMA - Classical Archaeology
Classical antiquity is period of roughly a thousand years between the rise of the Greek polis and the collapse of the Roman Mediterranean system, and includes at different times the entire Mediterranean basin and beyond. There are a variety of ways to examine this period, and today this panel will discuss the archaeology, or the material remains, a category that includes the massive monumental temple at Baalbek and the carbonized seeds from an Italian farmhouse. Our panelists introduce themselves:
/u/pqvarus: I've specialized in Ancient Greek Archaeology, my geographic field of interest is Asia Minor (from the Archaic Period onwards) and as a result of my PhD project I'm focussing on the archaeology of ancient greek religion (especially cult practice) and material culture studies.
/u/Astrogator: I've just finished my MA at the department of Ancient History and Epigraphics (my BA was in History, Philosophy and Political Science), and my main interests are in provincial epigraphic cultures, especially the Danube region, and the display of dress on sepulchral monuments (and how both are tied to questions of Romanization and Identity).
/u/Tiako: I am an MA student studying the economy of the Early Imperial Period of the Roman Empire. My focus is on commerce, particularly Rome's maritime trade with India.
However, there is more to classical civilization than marble temples an the Aeneid, and there is more to the period than Greece and Rome. To provide a perspective from outside what is usually considered “classical” civilization, we have included three panelists from separate but closely intertwined fields of study. They are:
/u/Aerandir: I am archaeologist studying Iron Age communities. Currently I am working on a PhD on the fortifications of the first millennium AD in Denmark. Danish and Dutch material is what I am most familiar with.
/u/missingpuzzle: I have studied Hellenistic period Eastern Arabia, particularly specializing in settlement patterns and trade. I have also studied the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean trade from the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods.
/u/Daeres: Hi I'm Daeres, and I have an MA in Ancient History. My archaeological focus is on the Ancient Near East in the First Millenium BC, Bactria, and the Aegean, though I am primarily a historian rather than an archaeologist. I have an inordinate fondness for numismatics, and also epigraphy. But I especially concentrate on the archaeological evidence for Hellenistic era Bactria.
And so with knots cut and die cast, we await your questions.
19
u/[deleted] Jan 21 '14 edited Jan 21 '14
I'm not on the panel but I can't resist sharing fieldwork stories. Plus, classicists go to cushy places like Italy. That's a holiday, not a dig!
To begin with, there's a big difference between university-run research projects and commercial excavations. The former involves a bunch of students and assorted specialists going out to out-of-the-way places for 2-6 weeks. The latter is professionals doing their day job. I think you were asking about research digs, and that's what I know more about, so I'll just talk about them.
An average working day
5.30 AM. Hear roommates start to get up for breakfast. Stay in bed because I prefer sleep to food.
6.20 AM. Get up, rush to ingest as much coffee as possible before the van arrives.
6.30 AM. Van arrives to take us to site. There are usually several teams doing different things in different places, so how long it takes to get there varies. The people who work in the lab get an extra 30 minutes. Lucky bastards.
7.00 AM. Start work, whatever that may be today. For me, it could be excavating, drilling boreholes, taking soil samples, fieldwalking, mapping, ground-truthing features identified in satellite imagery, fixing equipment, building shelves, or going on a lengthy jaunt to find an obscure object we desperately need for some sudden, unforeseen reason. Other people sieve and float soil, plan, record finds, process finds (lithics, ceramics, bones – generally there'll be at least one specialist in each), draw finds, do geophysics, spot analyse soil chemistry, fly kites, balloons or UAVs to take aerial photographs, and a thousand other things. Whatever it is it will almost certainly be tedious, and probably also physically taxing (except for the people who work in the lab. Lazy bastards.) But it's science! It's fun!
10.30 AM. Break time. Find some shade if you can, if not sit on the spoil heap, and have a snack.
11.00 AM. Back to work.
2.00 PM. Back to base for lunch and a siesta. I've only worked in hot countries, so it's important to do this to avoid being out in the sun in the hottest part of the day (I was once on a dig where for various logistical reasons this wasn't possible and it was horrendous). The people who work in the lab managed to get to the village shop before it also shuts for lunchtime so they get ice cream. Selfish bastards.
4.00 PM. Back to work. Theoretically, this is the best time to do odd jobs like processing data, cleaning equipment or cleaning finds. In reality, there's usually far too much to do, so it's back on site.
6.00 PM. Done for the day. Back to base for a shower. The lab people got back earlier than you and took all the hot water. Jammy bastards.
7.00 PM. Dinner and the evening off. Much appreciated.
So, in summary it's fairly long hours, six days a week, and hard, tedious work. It's not for everyone, but you're only there for a limited time and the majority of people there are passionate volunteers rather than paid workers (or undergraduate students with a course requirement).
An average evening
Yes, archaeologists are quite notorious drinkers. Tiako said it better than me: it's a bunch of students and academics cooped up with cheap alcohol. What do you expect? But in all seriously I do really enjoy the social side of digs, although again it's probably not for everyone. It's mostly students, often including a sizeable proportion of 18/19 year olds on their first dig, so the atmosphere in the evenings and on days off is a lot more "summer camp" than "academic research". You find yourself in very close quarters with a small group of people for a few weeks, so you get to know each other well and make great friends. And people hook up. Uh, a lot.
The routine for most evenings is to sit around outside drinking, play sports, play cards, watch movies, read, etc. The night before a day off you might push the boat out by having a party, going out and fraternising with the locals, building a campfire, or just sit around drinking slightly more than usual. On days off if it's a large dig there'll probably be some sort of organised excursion, unsurprisingly often to a historical/archaeological site. Personally I prefer extreme laziness on my days off and the only excursion I'm prepared to make is to the beach.
Logistics
An excavation of any size is quite a logistical challenge. Money comes primarily from whoever is funding your research. But unfortunately there has also been a tendency for people to look at students as funding sources. Archaeology is a hugely competitive field with many times more students than there are jobs, making getting training and fieldwork experience crucial for students. The demand means you can set your research dig up as a "training excavation" and get student workers that aren't just free, they pay you for letting them for you (and how much "training" you actually provide is totally up to you). On the one hand, funding is tight and it's hard to ignore that source of revenue. But it has the effect of raising the barriers to entering the profession, and limiting the opportunities of poorer students. In Europe, I think American students are particularly exploited, with people regularly getting away with charging them thousands of dollars to attend "field schools", and seeing them purely as cash cows, not even cheap labour, let alone potential future colleagues. Thankfully in the UK at least more departments are accepting that if you are going to require your students to get fieldwork experience, you also need to pay for it. If you're a student and you do have the money, it's simply a matter of applying to a dig like this. Oversubscribed (read: cheap) would select on the basis of your grades etc. If they're affiliated to a university, they'll probably either exclusively consider or strongly prefer their own students.
After that, things get better as you climb up the ladder. As a postgrad you'd generally get involved in digs through the academic grapevine, and will probably there because they have a useful specialism (e.g. zooarchaeology) and/or will be in some way responsible for analysing part of the data from the project. You'd expect to at least get travel expenses and a stipend. Any postdocs or academics involved would be responsible for a significant portion of the research output and probably have a (partial) salaried position as part of the project. Professional field archaeologists or other commercial consultants are also sometimes contracted by research digs – they'd get their usual salary, and the project would pay their employer.
I was going to write something about the practical logistical challenges of organising a dig, too... but this post is already absurdly long. If you're interested, I'll follow up.