Are treasure maps real?
Perhaps not “treasure maps”, but all archaeological digs involve searching for documentation before ever breaking ground. My fiancé, a budding archaeologist herself that has been on three or four dig sites informs me that all archaeological digs go through these phases. In a quick e-mail she said: Phase I identification surveys heres where you look for historical indications there was a site here etc [where you look for documentation] Phase 2 evaluation surveys looking at the actual site you’ll do a visual survey, collect stuff from the ground and take a look at where you may have higher concentrations of whatever kind of artifact you’re looking for Phase 3 mitigation or data recovery basically, DIG So every archaeological site goes through a phase where they look for clues or historical artifacts or documents in order to figure out where to dig. I can’t think of any particular famous discoveries made this way, but you could assume that pretty much all of them are.
The archaeology of historical periods is pretty much a constant back-and-forth between the material evidence and the textual record. When, for example, something hitherto unknown pops up in excavations in Rome, if it’s without anything that may immediately identify it (like monumental epigraphy), the first route to identifying a structure or monument will be to the texts the Romans themselves wrote when they were describing their city. This may help, as perhaps Cicero or Suetonius as an aside mentioned that a particular region of the city contained certain buildings, which might help make an identification of the structures you’re looking at in the bottom of the trench. Similarly, as has been mentioned in the reference to Schliemann, there was a time when archaeologists and historians did wander around the countryside with a copy of the Iliad or Appian or whoever tucked under their arm trying to locate specific places mentioned in the texts, and perhaps even dig there. Perhaps these ex
