It seems many of the most important archeological findings were in the 20th and 19th century. Why did humans wait so long to start digging stuff up?
In: 961
They did dig stuff up before, and usually promptly demolished it to recycle the building materials.
Studying the past is a “luxury” that requires both available capital and time to “waste” (for lack of a better term) on a non productive endeavor.
This is only really possible in the wealthy societies post industrial revolution.
In addition to what others have said, there was a certain robust studing of ancient sites throughout history. We just called it graverobbing.
life was considerably more difficult prior to some inventions & discoveries such as electricity.
Imo, the humans then just were too busy trying to survive everyday life.
I’m also sure that archeological findings did occur well into the past but some might not have found value in recording their findings as publications were not in heavy use back in those days, the public was not as well educated, not many interested parties
It began during the Renaissance (15th-16th centuries) with the rediscovery of ancient Latin and Greek texts. Renewed interest in ancient Roman and Greek culture revolutionized art and culture in Europe at that time. Antiquarians were people engaged in the study of ancient artifacts, and they were always around, but it wasn’t until the Enlightenment (17th -18th centuries) and the development of the scientific method that excavations of the major sites described in the texts started to interest people.
The development of modern universities that published their own research journals (18th century) was also an essential piece.
Archaeology as a science didn’t really emerge until the 18th century with Johann Wincklemann. He was the first to become an expert on ancient pottery and to start classifying it into different types. Archaeologists studying pottery (I wrote my master’s thesis on Hellenistic cooking pots) still rely on the foundation that his work created today.
Archeology isn’t completely a new thing. For example, the first people to study ancient Egyptian archeology were slightly less ancient Egyptians: Pharaoh Thutmose IV (ruled in the 14th century BC) led an excavation of the Great Sphinx of Giza (constructed in about the 26th century BC)
But the basic answer is the same reasons why all sciences have exploded in the last few centuries: economics, education, and the various technologies that have unlocked academic pursuits outside of a tiny wealthy elite. Plus increasing ease of long-distance travel: it became much easier to sail or fly to other countries and study/steal their ancient artifacts.
Depends on what you mean by archaeology. Sweden has had a National Heritage Board since 1630. The first couple of centuries were primarily concerned with registering monuments, transcribing runestones and acquiring stray finds that farmers had dug up by accident. There wasn’t a lot of excavations (that began in the early 19th century), but it was a form of archaeological work that was being done.
My favorite example of early archaeology and heritage restorations is the Egyptian prince Khaemweset, the fourth son of Ramesses II. He excavated and restored numerous old monuments and tombs, including several Old Kingdom pyramids.
You need a certain amount of wealth to dig up ancient treasures and say “This belongs in a museum” rather than “This is mine”. People have been digging up ancient sites since ancient times (even very recently after they were made…), but only recently have we stopped calling that “grave robbing” and applied a scientific method to it or have considered spending large amounts of resources for the sake of science and discovery alone. Consider the history of archaeology:
1. Digging up ancient treasures and just destroying them to get valuable metals and gems
2. Digging up ancient treasures and displaying them in personal collections
3. Digging up ancient treasures, displaying them in personal collections and taking note of scientific data
4. Digging up ancient treasures, displaying them in public museums and taking note of scientific data
5. Digging up ancient sites and taking note of scientific data
This has progressed from the goal being personal enrichment in material wealth to common enrichment in knowledge.
In addition to some of the helpful comments written here, I’d urge you to consider how different cultures view and value the past. Victor Hugo wrote *The Hunchback of Notre Dame* partially to argue that people should stop tearing down historic landmarks. Before the book’s publishing, most French saw nothing wrong with tearing down centuries-old buildings to build more useful stuff. The first historic preservation laws in Europe were only enacted after Hugo’s message gained traction.
There were periods were Italians broke down the Colosseum for construction fill. There were also periods when they absolutely were digging up old Roman artifacts and gushing over them. But my point is that one of the things that changed (though it did happen in the past) was a shift in perspective. Mainstream society began to value ancient history and archeology again.
Most modern Universities of the type that would have archaeology students to provide free labor have only been around for a few hundred years…
Archeology has always existed to some extent, preservation is better now because technology is better now.
It’s also a matter of individual values and perspectives, you have this clash even today with modern stuff. One person will say, ‘this has great historical and cultural value and must be protected, even at great financial cost’, while another will say ‘I can use this material to build houses’, and yet another will say, ‘there’s resources we can use to power industry under that junk and it’s getting in my way’.
Latest Answers