Hee hee, no. I've done some experimental archaeology and it's recreating how we think stuff was made and used and seeing if it works. If it doesn't, the theory is clearly wrong. But when you produce the same wear patterns/breakages/fragments as you find on digs, it's really exciting.
That said, I've been all three, an archaeologist, an experimental archaeologist and a "re-enactment geek", and love all three. If geeky is wanting to find out details about the past in terms of artefacts and lifestyle and in some cases recreate them as accurately as possible in order to more fully learn how things were made and used in the past, then I am 100% a geek and proud of it! *grin*
Oh, geekiness is awesome. I'm all for geekiness. I just wonder why someone is considered all impressive and respectable if they's doing experimental archaeology but crazy and out of touch with real life if they're doing re-enactment ;)
(Although of course after anthropology class I am tempted to say that a) just because you can't recreate something in some way doesn't mean that way is "clearly wrong", and b) if you manage to recreate something following some theory, that still doesn't mean the theory is right. *ducks*)
(Although of course after anthropology class I am tempted to say that a) just because you can't recreate something in some way doesn't mean that way is "clearly wrong", and b) if you manage to recreate something following some theory, that still doesn't mean the theory is right. *ducks*)
Oh no, I agree on both of those things, absolutely. A lot of the past will be speculation perforce - and I think that's one of the things that makes it so exciting! - and I also think it's very, very important to bear in mind that recreating something and having it work does not prove that's how it was, it can only ever show how it might have been.
As to the experimental archaeology/re-enactment thing I don't know. I wonder if it's because one is counted as "academic" based and the other as "hobby", "weekend warrior" stuff? I'm just speculating here, because I can't think of another reason!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
syntheid
no subject
Date: 2007-11-25 09:36 pm (UTC)That said, I've been all three, an archaeologist, an experimental archaeologist and a "re-enactment geek", and love all three. If geeky is wanting to find out details about the past in terms of artefacts and lifestyle and in some cases recreate them as accurately as possible in order to more fully learn how things were made and used in the past, then I am 100% a geek and proud of it! *grin*
no subject
Date: 2007-11-25 10:03 pm (UTC)(Although of course after anthropology class I am tempted to say that a) just because you can't recreate something in some way doesn't mean that way is "clearly wrong", and b) if you manage to recreate something following some theory, that still doesn't mean the theory is right. *ducks*)
no subject
Date: 2007-11-25 10:19 pm (UTC)Oh no, I agree on both of those things, absolutely. A lot of the past will be speculation perforce - and I think that's one of the things that makes it so exciting! - and I also think it's very, very important to bear in mind that recreating something and having it work does not prove that's how it was, it can only ever show how it might have been.
As to the experimental archaeology/re-enactment thing I don't know. I wonder if it's because one is counted as "academic" based and the other as "hobby", "weekend warrior" stuff? I'm just speculating here, because I can't think of another reason!
no subject
Date: 2007-11-25 10:22 pm (UTC)Yeah, that's probably it. If you don't earn money with it, it's considered crazy. Alas!
And I absolutely agree on the excitement and fascination of finding out how it might have been.