Radiocarbon dating is capable of giving the most accurate age of an artifact.

Answer Expert Verified. Out of the choices given, the one that would most likely be studied by an anthropologist is the formation of the first languages that were developed. An anthropologist is a person who studies the human civilization, past and present.

Archaeology is a sub field of Anthropology (one of four) so there is no difference. Both involved in the study of culture, though Archaeology concentrates on material culture and usually historical/ancient sites. Anthropology is the study of human culture: how people live and work and what they make.

Contour lines are used to show elevation on a topographic map. Lines or isolines on a map that connect points with the same elevation.

What method of dating bone would yield the most accurate results? the calendar age of an artifact.

Radiocarbon dating

Historians

Answer. Answer: It is likely that the least biased account of the December 7, 1941, attack on Pearl Harbor would be “c.a world history textbook’s account published in 2014,” since it is far removed from the event in terms of time.

The span of recorded history is roughly 5,000 years, beginning with the Sumerian cuneiform script, with the oldest coherent texts from about 2600 BC.

The first written records date back a little more than 5,000 years in Egypt and ancient Sumer. The earliest Sumerian records were made using reeds cut at an angle to make wedge-shaped (cuneiform) marks on clay, which was then baked hard. Many of these clay tablets survive today, and scholars can still read them.

Mughals

The Sumerian archaic cuneiform script and the Egyptian hieroglyphs are generally considered the earliest writing systems, both emerging out of their ancestral proto-literate symbol systems from 3400–3200 BCE with earliest coherent texts from about 2600 BCE.

You can’t trust history books and anything individually, and you can’t trust a whole bunch of sources if they’re from the same type of origin, e.g historians (they tend to agree, sometimes wrongly) or the internet (tends to disagree with itself and also be wrong).

If the sources all agree about an event, historians can consider the event proven. When two sources disagree on a particular point, the historian will prefer the source with most “authority”—that is the source created by the expert or by the eyewitness.

“History is an area of knowledge that studies the recorded past. It raises knowledge questions such as whether it is possible to talk meaningfully about a historical fact and what such a fact might be, or how far we can speak with certainty about anything in the past.

Is knowledge of the past ever certain? Knowledge of the past is never certain. History can be useful in predicting the future because if we understand patterns that formed in the past, we may be able to recognize patterns as they form.

Generally they should provide a background with which you can determine how the historian has reached his conclusions. They could either cite a source, which would make the conclusion an interpretation of the source (with which you could agree or disagree) or building on the works of other historians (or both).

An excelent knowledge and understanding of people, events, and contexts from a range of historical periods and of historical concepts and processes. A respect for historical evidence and the ability to make robust and critical use of it to support their explanations and judgments.