Why study archaeology?

This is a surprisingly common question that many people ask me when they learn what I am studying at university. It is usually followed by "how are you going to make money doing that?" In our money obsessed society one is often defined by his salary. And for those of us in the "non-practical" fields, i.e. social sciences or humanities, we are often forced to justify our choice. When faced with such questions I usually respond with a fiscal response. Stating that the average tenured professor at the University of Toronto makes over $100,000 a year (source: Macleans). Or for archaeology in particular I usually mention the opportunities for paid travel to exotic locations around the globe. Yet these explanations are not the real reason why I study archaeology, instead they are simple answers for simple people. No one questions someone's motivation when they are a business major. Apparently devoting your life to greed is no longer a sin but a virtue. However, devoting your life to the pursuit of knowledge and scholarship is viewed as a wasted existence.
The real reason why I study archaeology and history in general is some deep felt passion within me. A passion to understand what has happened in the past and not just know some random facts. Yet that is a purely emotional reason for devoting one's life to archaeology and does not provide a practical justification, or maybe it does?
The pursuit of knowledge should be justification enough, which it was prior to the modern age. I often wonder if Socrates and Plato had to justify their pursuit of knowledge and understanding to their contemporaries. I imagine Socrates would have enjoyed questioning the person who asked him such a thing.
I do not buy into the notion that by studying the ancient world we can somehow better understand our own. That is a useless platitude which many scholars use to justify their studies. Numerous books are written on the subject. With titles like: How the Gauls Made the Modern World, or Why the Romans Matter. While it is true that many of our political institutions are based upon earlier Greek and Roman paradigms they are more products of our own time than of the classical world. One can see in the past case studies of human nature and see parallels with our own world but one should be wary of drawing too great a parallel with earlier periods of history. There is not and never will be a scientific law of human nature, we are unpredictable creatures who on occasion do things contrary to any sense of logic or commonsense. That said, I study the past to understand the past not the present. Too often modern governments and regimes use history to serve their own ends. One need look no further than some of the ethnic struggles in the Middle East and Europe to see instances where modern states use a historical connection to the land to justify their control or conquest of it in the present. It is often dangerous and frankly poor scholarship to draw such parallels. Unfortunately archaeology is often drawn into politics.
I will reiterate once again, I study the past to understand the past. Regardless of what others think of my chosen field of study I do it because the study of the past is fascinating to me. There is no thrill on this earth I have yet known to top unearthing an artifact that has not been seen or held for over 2000 years. To know that the last person who held that coin or piece of pottery was alive when Caesar or Alexander walked the earth allows me for the briefest of moments to be transported to that time and place. An indescribable connection with the past is forged. It becomes somehow alive and not just dry words in some dusty book. The past is better than any novel you will ever read, the entirety of the human experience is played out in its pages we need only decipher it, and best of all it is real. And that is the reason why I study archaeology. That and I like to nitpick and argue.

Ciao, ciao for now.