Archaeologists need to quit being so quick to…

[RZehr]

…speculative attribute unknown artifacts to “religious rituals” or “ceremonial”.
Take a look around us. Most artifacts that mankind makes are not for these purposes. I suppose in the far distant future, kitchen spatulas and spark plugs will be in a museum and described as “ceremonial artifact”. The god of Champion, and the cult of NGK.

This behavior of linking religion with artifacts is stupid, and is poor science, and is demeaning to religion by constant association antiquity. Which I’m sure many archaeologists are perfectly okay with. But I find it bafflingly ridiculous.

[Ken]

…speculative attribute unknown artifacts to “religious rituals” or “ceremonial”.
Take a look around us. Most artifacts that mankind makes are not for these purposes. I suppose in the far distant future, kitchen spatulas and spark plugs will be in a museum and described as “ceremonial artifact”. The god of Champion, and the cult of NGK.

This behavior of linking religion with artifacts is stupid, and is poor science, and is demeaning to religion by constant association antiquity. Which I’m sure many archaeologists are perfectly okay with. But I find it bafflingly ridiculous.

Can you give a specific example that gave rise to this post?

[temporal1]

…speculative attribute unknown artifacts to “religious rituals” or “ceremonial”.
Take a look around us. Most artifacts that mankind makes are not for these purposes. I suppose in the far distant future, kitchen spatulas and spark plugs will be in a museum and described as “ceremonial artifact”. The god of Champion, and the cult of NGK.

This behavior of linking religion with artifacts is stupid, and is poor science, and is demeaning to religion by constant association antiquity. Which I’m sure many archaeologists are perfectly okay with. But I find it bafflingly ridiculous.

i enjoy reading about archaeology, i expect you’re right about the zeal to find what is wanted to be found.

a couple of questions i’ve had, one about unusual finds in odd locations .. often, the possibility of simple trade doesn’t seem to be considered. people managed to travel a lot, objects are carried, traded, left, lost, dropped, gifted, etc.

recently, it seems “all things found” demonstrate matriarchies/women warriors where not before considered.
presuming genders, eh?

digs must be funded.

[barnhart]

I think it is common today for people to treat objects in a ritual, ceremonial or religious way.

[Josh]

I think it is common today for people to treat objects in a ritual, ceremonial or religious way.

An anthropologist would be justified in believing people worshipped cars, smartphones, computers, and TVs.

[ken_sylvania]

I think it is common today for people to treat objects in a ritual, ceremonial or religious way.

Can you explain?

[RZehr]

…speculative attribute unknown artifacts to “religious rituals” or “ceremonial”.
Take a look around us. Most artifacts that mankind makes are not for these purposes. I suppose in the far distant future, kitchen spatulas and spark plugs will be in a museum and described as “ceremonial artifact”. The god of Champion, and the cult of NGK.

This behavior of linking religion with artifacts is stupid, and is poor science, and is demeaning to religion by constant association antiquity. Which I’m sure many archaeologists are perfectly okay with. But I find it bafflingly ridiculous.

Can you give a specific example that gave rise to this post?

No. I must be clicking on archeological discovery articles on Yahoo, because it seems to feed me a regular supply of them. And this tendency to speculate about rituals and ceremonies, is something that I started noticing. The most recent article was one where a tusk or board had three holes in it. And now some are saying they think it was used for rope making instead of ceremonial purposes.

[ken_sylvania]

…speculative attribute unknown artifacts to “religious rituals” or “ceremonial”.
Take a look around us. Most artifacts that mankind makes are not for these purposes. I suppose in the far distant future, kitchen spatulas and spark plugs will be in a museum and described as “ceremonial artifact”. The god of Champion, and the cult of NGK.

This behavior of linking religion with artifacts is stupid, and is poor science, and is demeaning to religion by constant association antiquity. Which I’m sure many archaeologists are perfectly okay with. But I find it bafflingly ridiculous.

Can you give a specific example that gave rise to this post?

No. I must be clicking on archeological discovery articles on Yahoo, because it seems to feed me a regular supply of them. And this tendency to speculate about rituals and ceremonies, is something that I started noticing. The most recent article was one where a tusk or board had three holes in it. And now some are saying they think it was used for rope making instead of ceremonial purposes.

"Roman dodecahedrons" would be another example.
Stonehenge

[Ken]

I think it is common today for people to treat objects in a ritual, ceremonial or religious way.

Cape dresses?

[barnhart]

I think it is common today for people to treat objects in a ritual, ceremonial or religious way.

Can you explain?

How many people do you know who's behavior says they believe money will make them happy.