A couple weeks ago, my roommate and I got into an argument over how morbid/strange my research topic is. I think this was in part brought on by my complaints of “Oh my God I don’t care about arrow heads or the stupid trash pits! Where are the bodies?”
Finding dead dogs can be difficult and I spent weeks looking through old records for them. I would tell her about other ridiculous things I found while looking, like the pages and pages of drawings of projectile points that somebody, somewhere, finds fascinating. But after a few too many demands for dead things to materialize on the pages before me, she told me that it sounded a bit strange. I mean, it was weird, wasn’t it, that I wanted to find dead people and their dead pets. At least she, with her more normal choice of topic was working with pottery and not ’studying dead people.’ To which I replied that if she called herself an archaeologist, she was studying dead people.
Anthropology is the study of people; that’s about the only thing anthropologists can agree on, that people are a focus of their work. To be an anthropological archaeologist, and ‘not just one of those classics people,’ you have to look at what the objects left behind say about the people who made and used them. And so, by studying pottery she was studying dead people just as much as I was. Unless of course she decided to claim that the pots formed, baked and broke themselves.
