Essay Example on I chose from the museum was a Greek helmet from 540 BCE

2 We can tell that the armor smiths are trying to protect the vital organs of the soldier The helmet itself dips down to below the soldier's mouth this might be an attempt to stop the soldiers throat being attacked The helmet also covers the wearers ears 1 At first glance this might not make sense because it might impact the soldier s ability to hear but it might be possible that the smiths are trying to block access to vital organs of the body head throat etc This possibility is supported by the construction of the helmet itself There are few openings besides the eyes and a narrow slit through which to talk or breathe The rest of the helmet is solid bronze to afford the most protection for the soldier The symbols on the helmet can also tell us about Greek society From the markings on the helmet it can be concluded that this civilization is not entirely warlike 3 This conclusion can be made because of the careful etchings onto the helmet that are present 3 If Greece cared only for war their helmets might be simpler as to allow faster production of them However the fact that they have these intricate designs indicates that the Greeks had a system of social status 3 They wanted their soldiers to have symbols on the helmets to either inspire or look fearsome on and off the battlefield This theory holds even more weight when considering the missing crest of the helmet The social status of the soldiers could have been high up in society and the markings on their helmets are status symbols of soldiers 

3 The symbols might even have a religious meaning The designs might be an homage to one of the Greek gods perhaps to honor him her and ask for that god or goddesses aid upon the battlefield 3 Or this might be a general's helmet and that is why it is more decorated with additional carvings to designate seniority in the army rankings In order to learn about the past experts must use a number of ways to decipher what is going on in each society First off they must discover and translate any written primary sources found in the culture Nonwritten primary sources can also be used to interpret what is going on in a culture but written ones can be more informative of the inner workings of a society Next the historian can take primary sources from cultures surrounding the first culture and see if there are any mentions of the firs culture within the other culture This could possible confirm or deny some bias within the culture and can help piece together what that culture was really like Eventually the historian must be a detective and attempt to fit all of the pieces primary sources into a puzzle that makes logical sense given the time period other civilizations and many other factors to create a history of each group of people they've studied