STUDENT INTEGRATING METHODS IN THE TERTIARY EDUCATION OF ARCHAEOLOGISTS: AN EXAMPLE FROM GOTHENBURG, SWEDEN (original) (raw)
Related papers
Excavation as a Ground of Archaeological Knowledge
The paper argues the case that, while archaeological practice involves the application of multiple methods and techniques, excavation is historically rooted as the core method of the discipline, conditioning all the others. Excavation is to archaeology as ethnography is to social anthropology. It is not only a principal ground of archaeological knowledge production. In a fundamental sense, excavation is constitutive of what it is to be an archaeologist.
Archaeology - from being an Art to being a Science.
2014
Archaeology is not merely the study of antiquity through the systematic discovery, colleting and documenting of ancient things. It is also the appreciation and interpretation of things and their agency which shed light on the character and dynamics of past (and present) societies.
Whither Archaeologists? Continuing challenges to field practice.
Antiquity, 2019
Current archaeological practice in the UK and elsewhere focuses on the collection of empirical data. While scholars have proposed theoretical advances in field techniques, very few of these methods have been adopted in commercial archaeology. A combination of increased time pressure on development projects and the conservatism of the sector contribute to challenging times for archaeological practice. Additional complexity is introduced by large-scale infrastructure projects unsuited to standardised field techniques. This article explores these issues, calling for a flexible, consultative approach to project design and implementation, to ensure the longevity of both archaeology and the archaeological profession.
2007
Author: Brigitte Cech. Brigitte Cech 2007: 'University Strategies in Teaching Fieldwork Techniques - A View from an Independent Practitioner,' in From Concepts of the Past to Practical Strategies: The Teaching of Archaeological Field Techniques. Peter Ucko, Editor-in-Chief Qin Ling and Jane Hubert Editors. Commissioning Editor and General Editor: Sajid Rizvi. ISBN 9781872843704. London: Saffron 2007. When I started to work as an independent researcher I faced the problem of how to obtain funds. I soon realised that at university we had learned nothing about fund-raising or how to organise the logistics of archaeological excavations. My first independent research project took place in the Austrian Alps, in the middle of nowhere at an altitude of 2100m above sea level. The site is about two hours walk from civilisation and it is part of a nature preserve and a mining area, which means that additional permits were necessary. Preparing the application for funding and organising everything was like jumping into ice-cold water and learning how to swim or just drowning ignominiously. Luckily the employees of the Austrian Science Foundation and colleagues from other academic disciplines turned out to be extremely helpful. Since then I have successfully organised many research projects. When I started to prepare this chapter I talked to my students about the university fieldwork classes that are compulsory for obtaining a degree in archaeology. These discussions, together with my experiences, resulted in a wish list of what should be taught in such compulsory fieldwork classes. The most important is perhaps that classes on ‘theory’ should precede fieldwork itself. Another aspect of my work concerns the involvement of amateurs in archaeological fieldwork. How to involve the general public in archaeological excavations is unfortunately not taught at Austrian universities, and equally unfortunately such involvement is very rarely allowed.... Follow links for further info on this book.
2022
SUMMARY: This pdf of a power point summary lecture serves as a guide for either TEST no.2 (end-of-term) for the in-class version of Anth.106 (Introduction to Archaeology), or TAKE-HOME no.2 (end-of-term assignment) for the online class version of the same course. It provides a summary of 25 selected, key concepts and an example extracted from the textbook (Renfrew and Bahn, 2019 [8th edition]), in part-1, and the summary notes from the special lectures in part-2. The summary covers such post-excavation analysis options, including assessing (a) technology, (b) trade, contact, and exchange, (c) cognitive aspects (religion; language; art; etc.), (d) appearance (bio-archaeology; health; diet; clothing; etc.), and (e) processes of change. It also considers some benefits of archaeology for people today. POSTED: May 3, 2022.
Title: Post-excavation assessment, analysis and dissemination in modern archaeological practice
The anticipated boom in planning-led archaeology will lead to unprecedented amounts of data being produced. However there are concerns that much of this data will be redundant, despite the care and resources spent upon its collection. Audiences are being missed, or worse, ignored. We are facing a crossroads in our professional practice, largely due to how we undertake post-excavation. The current post-excavation assessment procedures were initially established by English Heritage (1991) and have been widely followed across the sector. We have now been using them for 25 years, without a formalised review or renewal. In the meantime, the dual pressures of programme and budget have become more acute and the sheer amount of data created on an average City of London project (for example) can be too complex to be analysed effectively within the timescales available (Cumberpatch 2015). The key question we have failed to ask ourselves thus far is who we are trying to engage. The vast majority of our published material is aimed at fellow archaeologists and the academic sector but the use of archived data remains uncommon. Academic priorities for urban archaeology centre upon synthesis (Bryant and Thomas 2015, 18), which requires the adherence to research strategies (Museum of London 2002, Rowsome and Baker 2016) but these are rarely explicitly adopted, so despite regular calls for improved synthesis (Millett 2013; 2016; Perring 2015; Wilson 2016), it remains clear that there are limited possibilities for thematic work, despite the vast amounts of archived data. We should perhaps redirect our efforts to attract a wider variety of audiences. This proposal leads on from my recently completed PhD which examined professional practice in the City of London and led me to consider that there should be far less distinction made between the worlds of 'commercial' and 'academic' archaeology. The opportunity to study at the McDonald Institute would be the ideal progression from this viewpoint. My employer MOLA has been an industry leader in the innovation of techniques and are keen to encourage this field of study, particularly as our profession is looking forward to the positive influence of the HS2 project.
Different methods, different terms: understanding old excavations
S. Golubovic et al. (eds), Limes XXIIII. Proceedings of the 24 th International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, Serbia 2018, 2023
Present day archaeologists encounter relatively often the situation where the site that they are excavating has been investigated before them in one way or another by archaeologists in the past. Sometimes these predecessors have been investigating the site quite a long time ago, possibly 70, 100 years ago or even longer than that. It is thus not surprising that the past researchers used quite different investigation methods than the ones of today. Even quite basic excavation and interpretation methods like stratigraphical digging or providing the scale and orientation in the archaeological drawing and photography were not a given-at least not everywhere in the world-say 100 years ago. Similar issues arise when it comes to written archaeological report in the past. From the terms used for describing the excavation technique to the ones for the uncovered archaeological features, the wording of some old reports can sometimes be puzzling or even misleading. The purpose of my paper is to examine the relation of a modern-day archaeologist to his predecessors, the scientific gains, but also the hurdles of this relation. I base in this approach mainly on my own experiences, that I'm presenting as two case studies. First case study is based on my reading of the well known volumes Der obergermanisch-raetische Limes des Roemerreiches, that were published between 1894-1937. Second case study encompasses my experience as the leader of excavations in the auxiliary fort from Vărădia, in the southwest of Roman Dacia (in nowadays Romania), where at least two predecessors have excavated-one of them (Felix Milleker) more than 100 years ago, the other one (Grigore Florescu) approximately 80 years ago-and then reported about their research. It turned out that in these cases too there are essential differences in methods and terms between our predecessors and our times. This however doesn't rend the old excavations and reports useless, even as the earlier researchers could see structures and aspects that are physically not visible anymore today.
2023
SUMMARY: This pdf of a power point summary lecture serves as a guide for either TEST no.1 (mid-term) for the in-class version of Anth.106 (Introduction to Archaeology), or TAKE-HOME no.1 (mid-term assignment) for the online class version of the same course. It provides a summary of 25 selected, key concepts and an example extracted from the textbook (Renfrew and Bahn, 2019 [8th edition]), in part-1, and the summary notes from the special lectures in part-2. The summary covers such things as research design, finding sites (regional survey), how to select where to excavate on a given site, some excavation and recording techniques, and some post-excavation analysis options. POSTED: May 2023.
The key chain of archaeology is not stronger than its weakest link
"Debating contract led archaeology in Sweden: "We live in a changing world in which terms such as “cost efficiency” and “quality assurance” have become doxa. This is apparent to the ar- chaeological field in general and to development-led archaeology (DA) in particular. Since the new regulations for the DA in Sweden were an- nounced, I have noticed a rising discontent among my archaeological colleagues. This goes for researchers at the academic strongholds as well as those who work on a daily basis with DA at the National Her- itage Board, museums, foundations and firms, but also those situated at the county administrations in different parts of Sweden. All seem to agree that the current system is not functioning and that something must be done"."