Difference Between History & Archaeology
It is a sound understanding of the past that helps us as humans understand the way this civilization has evolved. It is important to study the past events and civilizations in details as the information and evidences gathered from these studies gives us a balanced perspective to the numerous situations we encounter today as the reason for a civilization to flourish and/or perish. In here the significance of two deeply interrelated subjects history and archaeology comes into play. It is the intent of both the archaeologists and historians to comprehend and expose us to the past happenstances in every way possible. But the major differences lie in their approaches and styles.
A historian puts forth an interpretation of the events that transpired in the past in their own words and that is essentially what we call history. It is an entirely intellectual study of the events and happenstances of the past without forming any judgements or applying any subjectivity. It is the primary objective of a historian to document the data and proofs on the basis of the chronicles of the past that are available to them and to then reconstruct the chronological sequence of events that transpired without any scope for any kind of prejudice. The subject or context of history begins only when writing was invented and the people began keeping a written record of the events of the time. The events that occurred in the period before the invention of writing are referred to as prehistoric. Prehistory constitutes of the events that are essentially out of the scope of history as there is no evidence to support them. History includes accurate information about the events in the past as they happened, when they happened, and why they happened.
An archaeologist digs into the womb of the earth to unearth artefacts or articles that prove to be rich sources of knowledge and information. It is through these archaeological finds that an archaeologist comes up with an analysis and is able to reconstruct the chronology of events as they might have occurred in that period. In this sense archaeology and history are quite closely related, however the findings of an archaeological study cannot be as accurate as the ones from historical studies. Historical studies are interpreted from the narratives that the people of those times left behind and are well substantiated, however the archaeological studies are conducted by stringing together the loose ends on the basis of the experience that the archaeologists may have gathered in their lives and through their research.
Ancient civilizations that may not have any kind of representation in the history are brought together with the help of dug up articles and fossils during archaeological studies. Though both the fields attempt to unveil the past events for us but the prime difference between the two is that archaeology consists of looking for and finding things whereas history is a recollection of the events of the past based on the chronicles left behind by people of those times. In a sense archaeology is also a kind of history where archaeologists attempt to deduce the sequence of events in the past through an analysis of the articles they find. It is intelligent guess work while history is all about proofs, facts, and data that is already present but may need to be put together in a more effective manner.