Question

Whenever archaeologists excavate a site, they use primary and secondary sources to learn about that site and its artifacts. Are these research methods enough to give complete information about the discovered site or artifact? What other methods do you suggest to help uncover more information about the archaeological find? Do you think that information gained from oral history is helpful or misleading while concluding an archaeological find?

a) No, additional methods like carbon dating could offer more insights
b) Yes, primary and secondary sources provide exhaustive details
c) No, aerial surveys and ground-penetrating radar can yield more data
d) Yes, oral history adds clarity and authenticity to the findings

Answer 1

No, additional methods like carbon dating could offer more insights.

Step-by-step explanation:

Archaeologists often use primary and secondary sources when excavating a site, but these methods alone may not provide complete information. Additional methods like carbon dating can offer more insights, allowing for more precise dating of artifacts. Aerial surveys and ground-penetrating radar are also valuable in uncovering more data about the archaeological find. While oral history can provide cultural insights, it should be approached cautiously and verified with other sources to ensure accuracy.

Answer 2

Using primary and secondary sources alone is not enough to provide complete information about an archaeological site or artifact. Other methods like carbon dating, aerial surveys, and ground-penetrating radar can help uncover more information. Oral history can be helpful but should be cross-referenced with other sources for accuracy.

Step-by-step explanation:

Using primary and secondary sources is important but not enough to give complete information about an archaeological site or artifact. Other methods can be used to uncover more information, such as carbon dating which can provide insights into the age of the artifacts. Aerial surveys and ground-penetrating radar can also yield more data by revealing hidden structures and features at the site.

While oral history can be helpful in understanding the context and personal experiences related to an archaeological find, it should be treated with caution as it can be subjective and prone to inaccuracies or biases. It is important to cross-reference oral history with other sources and evidence to ensure accuracy.