When I started to read archaeology in 2002 a new world emerged. The world where the landscapes no longer just were nice backdrops – but rather something full of stories to tell the skilled eye. The fauna could tell me some about its human history, if any settlements were present somewhere in recent times. Hills, mounds, stonewalls, ruins and ancient roads suddenly where more than just random formations – I could really see them in a way and context I couldnt before.
When I started reading geology another chapter still emerged. Now I could understand also the history of the landscape and separate that from the man made. Why rocks looked like they did, why a landscape was shaped like it was. Suddenly I started to see why some lands where farmed and others not. I could combine the two knowledges to new insights.
Basically, I cannot look at nature and landscapes the same again after this. A hill is not just a hill anymore – but so much more. I guess this happens to most geologists (and archaeologists). However – Im quite sure it doesnt happen to them all. Some just dont have that interested X-ray stare when they look at nature. They kinda look just as uninterested of everything as they did before studying.They somehow still only see a hill out of context – if they even see the hill.
And that amazes me. Talk about making the wrong choise in life. If youre not really interested in rocks/landscapes or just passionate about “how stuff works” even – youre in the wrong business.
Inspired by this post on Ting & tankar (in Swedish only)