The study of ancient societiesa)Anthropologyb)Archaeologyc)Historyd)EthnologyCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

UPSC Exam > UPSC Questions > The study of ancient societiesa)Anthropologyb...

Join the Discussion on the App

The study of ancient societies

a)
Anthropology
b)
Archaeology
c)
History
d)
Ethnology

Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Test: One Word Substitutes- 1

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Verified Answer

The study of ancient societiesa)Anthropologyb)Archaeologyc)Historyd)Et...

Anthropology is the scientific study of humans, human behavior and societies in the past and present.
Archaeology is the scientific study of the material remains of past human life and activities.
History is the past as it is described in written documents, and the study thereof.
Ethology is the study of the characteristics of different peoples and the differences and relationships between them.

View all questions of this test

Most Upvoted Answer

The study of ancient societiesa)Anthropologyb)Archaeologyc)Historyd)Et...

Arch/a means ancient and logy means to study of something, therefore archaeology refers to the study of ancient cultures or society.

Answered by Notes Wala · View profile

Free Test

FREE

Test: One Word Substitutes- 1
10 Ques | 10 Min

Start Free Test

View all free UPSC tests

Community Answer

The study of ancient societiesa)Anthropologyb)Archaeologyc)Historyd)Et...

The Study of Ancient Societies
The correct answer is Archaeology. Here’s why:
Definition of Archaeology
- Archaeology is the scientific study of human history and prehistory through excavation and analysis of artifacts, structures, and other physical remains.
- It focuses on uncovering material evidence left behind by ancient civilizations, which provides insights into their cultures, practices, and daily lives.
Methods Used in Archaeology
- Excavation: Archaeologists carefully dig at historical sites to uncover artifacts and ecofacts.
- Analysis: Once artifacts are recovered, they are analyzed to understand their significance in the context of the society that created them.
- Dating Techniques: Various methods like radiocarbon dating help determine the age of the findings, offering a timeline of ancient societies.
Distinction from Other Fields
- Anthropology studies human behavior and societies, but it encompasses both ancient and contemporary cultures, not limited to the material aspects.
- History relies primarily on written records to study past events and societies, while archaeology focuses on physical evidence.
- Ethnology compares and analyzes cultures, often using ethnographic methods, but does not specifically emphasize the material remains of ancient societies.
Conclusion
- Archaeology is essential for understanding ancient societies as it provides a tangible connection to the past through the remnants they left behind.
- By studying these remnants, archaeologists can reconstruct the lives, beliefs, and social structures of civilizations that existed long before written history.

Share via Whatsapp

Attention UPSC Students!

To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed UPSC study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in UPSC.

Current Affairs & Hindu Analysis: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

Lucent for GK

History for UPSC CSE

Indian Polity for UPSC CSE

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for UPSC exam

Similar UPSC Doubts

The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks own golden dreama community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosuss ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-stat e) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation? I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.

View answer

The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks own golden dreama community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosuss ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-stat e) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. Considering the arguments made in the passage, with which of the following statements would the author be most likely to agree?

View answer

The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks own golden dreama community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosuss ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-stat e) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.The statement: The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games indicates that the author believes that

View answer

Mention the rules for competitions in ancient Olympic games?

View answer

In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980sThe first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits. Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies. Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a products total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quickto exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ.Which of the following would most weaken the authors argument about the over-concentration on high technology products?

View answer

Top Courses for UPSCView all

Current Affairs & Hindu Analysis: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

Lucent for GK

History for UPSC CSE

Indian Polity for UPSC CSE

CSAT Preparation