As of today, many scholars have come up with different theories while trying to explain Archeology. This has, as a result, led to the emergence of many controversies in this field. Such claims are usually pseudoscientific; on the other hand, other similar applications are based on the current experience and often politicized. The attempt is, however, meant to establish a boundary in as far as these claims are concerned. On the similar note, these claims fall under several categories; despite some appearing to be realistic, one is likely to notice how some are sensationalized and may even seem to be myths. However, it is possible to differentiate them based on facts as a result of proven scientific methods. At times, such theories are likely to frighten many owing to the level of controversy the raise, but in line with this, different scholars have as well worked hard to clear such debates while working towards reaching a definite resolve.
Learners are, therefore, better placed to gain a lot of skill thus likely to make an informed decision when dealing with such issues. While doing so, it is possible to obtain a deeper understanding to deal with the subject and as well approach archeology from a skeptic point of view, critically analyzing such claims before making an informed decision. They are as well likely to experience a challenging kind of experience but still better placed to gain a deeper understanding on how archaeologists approach such issues. When not well handled, many conflicts are likely to emerge with the public being divided on how to draw near a conclusion.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Many seminars are usually held with the sole aim aimed at providing a clear analysis of the current issues of concern. Such topics are prone to draw a lot of discussion in public with many keen on questioning how different conclusions arrived at without having tangible proof to establish the allegations. Among the primary approach used while studying archaeology has been the use of DNA while analyzing historical finds (Banning, 2011). Some of such artifacts are quite ancient and avail the much-needed clues which help trace the past. The use of this approach, is, however, not limited to this alone but can be applied to bones as well but not limited to this solely. Scientists have as well managed to reconstruct different discoveries.
On the other hand, it was also discovered that different scientific approaches lead to different outcomes thus only contradicting such findings. This also proves that the reliability of such methods is also questionable. It is essential to ensure the means via which the primary data was collected are as well reliable or rather of great quality to come up with a reasonable conclusion. At times, most scientific assumptions are not tested thus cannot be relied upon.
Archaeological controversies have, therefore, become quite common of late, Gobekli is not an exception owing to the level of research directed at it by archeologists. Despite carrying out several excavations, archeologists are yet to come up with clear findings. During such excavations, many discoveries were found dating back to the 9th millennium BC. It is, therefore hard to classify Gobekli as residential. Among the main features visible at this site is the raised topography (Schmidt, 2005). As a result, it is clear to say that the site might have been utilized to accomplish different functions. The site could have acted as a shrine for the then human population who existed at the time. From such findings, it is clear that rituals were usually carried out at the time; this was right before sedentary communities emerged.
To a great extent, such establishments played a significant role among such communities. It was also possible to notice such sites owing to their distinct features as compared to settlements. On the other hand, ritual sites were as well synonymous for playing a central role during the time. The cultures also derived a lot from the rituals since they portrayed their way of life. All this is depicted in Gobekli Tepe which as well served as a ritual center (Banning, 2011).
Such centers did not only play a religious role instead also utilized while undertaking the exchange of ideas as well as conducting trade. There are instances when such sites were as well set up at uninhabited areas. However, this was kept secret and only revealed to specific individuals within such communities. They thus played a special kind of position within these societies and visited during a special occasion. There is a likelihood of such shrines being established long before settlement began taking place within such regions.
According to Banning (2011), he was of the same opinion owing to the many discoveries of similar structures indicating that shrines existed during the time. It was, therefore, common to find such places in East Asia, as a result, the structures indicate that cults were quite common at the time. Other findings pointed out that there was a likelihood of such shrines being utilized while undertaking domestic activities. As a result, such structures differed much when considering their symbolic elaboration. However, there wasn’t much distinction from such shrines and settlements. It is, therefore clear that it was hard for an archaeologist to make a conclusion as to whether their finding was a shrine or just a mere settlement. One would also easily identify shrines owing to the existence of skulls but could still signify, the existence of a mortuary chamber.
The structures were as well massive in nature and made through quarrying activities on the limestone. One the same note it was also found out that domestic operations continued to take place around such structures thus calling for the need to employ more research on the topic. The existence of art is as well scrutinized owing to the existence of decoration on such structures. Such information is key in providing the much-needed clue on the kind of life at the time (Banning, 2011).
Currently, many communities continue to experience a differed opinion on how they handle such challenges; a good example is depicted by the Red Indians in North America owing to their traditional approach while dealing with the dead. Some still hold the view that there is no need to disturb the dead, this also illustrates how such an attempt to gather credible information on archeology can be inhibited. Even after making incredible discoveries with the discovery of artifacts, they still emphasize the importance to consider conducting special ceremonies during their burial (Schmidt, 2005). This is a unique example of how much such communities have continued to treasure their tradition since the days of old but could still hinder archeologist from continuing with their quest to unravel hidden mysteries. With time, the general attitude among people has also changed in favor of such communities while trying to signify the importance of cherishing such traditions now that they are still treated as a great heritage thus ought to be preserved.
From the general perspective, despite there being many controversies, it must be acknowledged that archeologist has achieved a lot. It has also helped us understand our rich past which may have been hidden for many centuries us we trying to define our past. This is done through the reconstruction of such histories while making use of different approaches but still bound to experience many challenges. Among the mean reasons impeding such a process is because of such a past not being documented owing to the level of civilization being less aware or rather still young as compared to how a lot of transformation has been realized today.
Conclusion
Despite some supporting the need to repatriate artifacts, most of which may have been linked to specific ethnic groups. Some have posted a different view now that it still could be hard to ascertain whether the proposed group may even be linked to such findings owing to them dating back to ancient civilization. On the same note, the use of such information could as well help make different breakthroughs while trying to address the many challenges being experienced today, especially in the medical world. As a result, archeological artifacts can as well act as a great treasure when cherished and represent a rich heritage among different nations.
References
Banning, E. B. (2011). So fair a house: Gobekli Tepe and the identification of temples in the Pre- Pottery Neolithic of the Near East . Current Anthropology 52(5): 619-660.
Schmidt, K. (2005). “ Ritual Centers” and the Neolithisation of Upper Mesopotamia . Neo- Lithics. 2/05: 13-21.
