But how do we KNOW?

With the uptick in global travel I've experienced in the last couple of years, I've had the chance to visit several archaeological sites: Teotihuacan, Machu Picchu, Tikal, Paquimé, and Atlantes. Sometimes, I've had a tour guide, other times it's been a solo venture. And of the guided tours, some seemed a little more credentialed than others, but since I only know one of them personally, it's hard to judge. 

Anyway, all of these sites are talking about civilizations from over a millennia ago, and there don't seem to be a ton of written records left behind. Just ruins, or temples, or statues, or buildings. I think in some cases, like with Machu Picchu or Tikal, there are still living descendants of the original civilizations (I get these tours in Spanish, and I'm usually with a group of at least a dozen people, and sometimes, I don't get all of the historical context, so forgive me on the details). But I still always ask myself: How do we KNOW?

How do we know that the number 4 was sacred to them? I mean, if you make a square, there are 4 corners. That might just be geometry, and not religion. 

How do we know how they used a certain building that has been empty for hundreds of years? How do we know it was for meditation or whatever, and not a guest room? 

How do we know what an eagle meant to them? Maybe it was a symbol of a God. Or maybe they just thought they looked cool.

And it's not just sites in Latin America I ask this about. I wonder every time anyone is presenting archaeological evidence. How do we know what we found was a mound of offerings to a God and not just a trash pile? How do we know that because of one skeleton, a whole society did a thing that we deduced from looking at bones in a hole? (Sorry, no disrespect to the bone owner). 

Legit there may be some records. And I'm sure that archaeologists aren't just making stuff up. There are professional standards, there's methodology, etc. And maybe I'm just biased because I'm an archivist and I deal in records where people wrote down what they did and why*. I just always wonder how archaeologists know what they know, ya know?

I also always wonder how I can prank future archaeologists. I mean, what totally misleading clues can I leave for them? All of the physical traces we leave, what would someone think about us in 1000 years? They might think we worshipped plastic. Or that we worshipped these square devices with plastic and glass and chips (they may not be too far off). It is entertaining to think of what they would make of us based on the trash we leave behind, and again, contemplate how to totally mislead them. 

Anyway, I really do love visiting those old sites. Teotihuacan was probably my favorite, but they are all just so fascinating. We think we're so smart, and then I go to these places and am blown away with the things they came up with. Without computers, by the by. And even though they are kind of mysterious, and enigmatic, I think about how they were parents and siblings and spouses and trying to provide for their families and cope with a world that probably felt pretty insane to them sometimes**, too, and it's kind of reassuring. Even if it is just a story I made up.  

*not that you should automatically believe records just because they were written by the people involved. People lie, in real life and on paper. And we can select what records survive. But at least it's a contemporary saying something, so we take what we can get. 

**I think that is probably what guides archaeologists, is the fact that people are people, wherever and whenever you find them.