Archaeology Jokes

Archaeology Jokes

An archeologist is a person whose career lies in ruins!

  An archaeologist was digging in the Negev Desert in Israel and 
came upon a casket containing a mummy.  After examining it, he 
called the curator of a prestigious natural history museum.
  "I've just discovered a 3,000 year old mummy of a man who died
of heart failure!" the excited scientist exclaimed.
  To which the curator replied, "Bring him in. We'll check it out."
  A week later, the amazed curator called the archaeologist. "You 
were right about the mummy's age and cause of death. How in the 
world did you know?"
  "Easy. There was a piece of paper in his hand that said, 
'10,000 Shekels on Goliath'."

  Most mothers tell their daughters to marry doctors...
I told mine to marry an archeologist because the older she gets,
the more interested he will be in her.

  A week or so ago several British newspapers ran a story about 
the oldest joke in world, which was found by The British Museum's 
Egyptology department on a slip of papyrus. It was told in 2600 BC 
about the pharaoh Sneferu by his chief magician Djadjamankh.
  Here it is (apologies if you've heard it before, but it is 
a very old joke):

  How do you entertain a bored pharaoh?

  You sail a boatload of young women dressed only in fishing nets 
down the Nile and urge the pharaoh to go catch a fish.
(Maybe it loses something in translation or maybe it was the 
way Djadjamankh told them!)

  Those Busy Archeologists: "A British archeologist has found 
globs of flavored tar that was chewed and spat out by a prehistoric
man," says Jenny Church. "It's the first fossil evidence of Major 
League Baseball."

  A team of archaeologists was excavating in Israel when they came upon
a cave. Written on the wall of the cave were the following symbols in 
order of appearance.

1. A woman
2. A donkey
3. A shovel
4. A fish
5. A Star of David

  They decided that this was a unique find and the writings were at least
more than three thousand years old.  They chopped out the piece of stone 
and had it brought to the museum where archaeologists from all over the 
world came to study the ancient symbols.
  They held a huge meeting after months of conferences to discuss what
they could agree was the meaning of the markings. The President of their
society stood up and pointed at the first drawing and said:
  "This looks like a woman. We can judge that this race was family
oriented and held women in high esteem." "You can also tell they were
intelligent, as the next symbol resembles a donkey, so, they were smart
enough to have animals help them till the soil. The next drawing looks
like a shovel of some sort, which means they even had tools to help them."
  "Even further proof of their high intelligence is the fish which means
that if they had a famine hit the earth, whereby the food didn't grow,
they would take to the sea for food."
  "The last symbol appears to be the Star of David which means they were
evidently Hebrews."
  The audience applauded enthusiastically and the President smiled and
said, "I'm glad to see that you are all in full agreement with our
  "Suddenly a little old man stood up in the back of the room and said,
"I object to every word. The explanation of what the writings say is 
quite simple. First of all, everyone knows that Hebrews don't read from
left to right, but from right to left...
  Now, look again...It now says:
"'Holy Mackerel, Dig The Ass On That Woman!'"

How do you embarrass an archeologist?
Give him a used tampon and ask him which period it came from.

  An archaeologist in the deepest Amazon suddenly finds himself surrounded
by a blood thirsty group of natives. Upon surveying the situation, he says
quietly to himself, "Oh God, I'm screwed."
  There is a ray of light from heaven and a voice booms out, "No you are
NOT screwed. Pick up that stone at your feet and bash in the head of the
chief standing in front of you."
  So the archaeologist picks up the stone and proceeds to bash the living
shit out of the chief. As he stands above the lifeless body, breathing
heavily and surrounded by 100 natives with a look of shock on their
faces, God's voice booms out again, "Okay...NOW you're screwed."

Paleoanthropology Division
Smithsonian Institute
207 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20078

Dear Sir:

   Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled
"211-D, layer seven, next to the clothesline post. Hominid skull." 
We have given this specimen a careful and detailed examination, 
and regret to inform you that we disagree with your theory that 
it represents "conclusive proof of the presence of Early Man in 
Charleston County two million years ago." Rather, it appears that 
what you have found is the head of a Barbie doll, of the variety 
one of our staff, who has small children, believes to be the 
"Malibu Barbie". It is evident that you have given a great deal 
of thought to the analysis of this specimen, and you may be quite 
certain that those of us who are familiar with your prior work in 
the field were loathe to come to contradiction with your findings. 
However, we do feel that there are a number of physical attributes 
of the specimen which might have tipped you off to it's modern 

  1. The material is molded plastic. Ancient hominid remains are 
typically fossilized bone.

  2. The cranial capacity of the specimen is approximately 9 cubic 
centimeters, well below the threshold of even the earliest identified 

  3. The dentition pattern evident on the "skull" is more consistent 
with the common domesticated dog than it is with the "ravenous man
eating Pliocene clams" you speculate roamed the wetlands during that 
time. This latter finding is certainly one of the most intriguing 
hypotheses you have submitted in your history with this institution, 
but the evidence seems to weigh rather heavily against it. Without 
going into too much detail, let us say that:

  A. The specimen looks like the head of a Barbie doll
     that a dog has chewed on.
  B. Clams don't have teeth.

  It is with feelings tinged with melancholy that we must deny your
request to have the specimen carbon dated. This is partially due to 
the heavy load our lab must bear in it's normal operation, and partly 
due to carbon dating's notorious inaccuracy in fossils of recent 
geologic record. To the best of our knowledge, no Barbie dolls were 
produced prior to 1956 AD, and carbon dating is likely to produce 
wildly inaccurate results. Sadly, we must also deny your request 
that we approach the National Science Foundation's Phylogeny 
Department with the concept of assigning your specimen the scientific 
name "Australopithecus spiff-arino." Speaking personally, I, for one, 
fought tenaciously for the acceptance of your proposed taxonomy, but 
was ultimately voted down because the species name you selected was 
hyphenated, and didn't really sound like it might be Latin.

  However, we gladly accept your generous donation of this fascinating 
specimen to the museum. While it is undoubtedly not a hominid fossil, 
it is, nonetheless, yet another riveting example of the great body of 
work you seem to accumulate here so effortlessly. You should know that 
our Director has reserved a special shelf in his own office for the 
display of the specimens you have previously submitted to the 
Institution, and the entire staff speculates daily on what you will 
happen upon next in your digs at the site you have discovered in your 
back yard. We eagerly anticipate your trip to our nation's capital 
that you proposed in your last letter, and several of us are pressing 
the Director to pay for it. We are particularly interested in hearing
you expand on your theories surrounding the "trans-positating 
fillifitation of ferrous ions in a structural matrix" that makes the 
excellent juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex femur you recently discovered 
take on the deceptive appearance of a rusty 9-mm Sears Craftsman 
automotive crescent wrench.

                  Yours in Science,
                     Harvey Rowe
                     Curator, Antiquities

View Stats Free Counters!