An Aspect of Archaeology's Recent Past and Its Relevance in the New Millennium (Jeremy A. Sabloff and Wendy Ashmore) (2001) (original) (raw)
Related papers
Settlement and Landscape Archaeology (Gary M. Feinman, 2015)
Feinman, G.M., 2015. Settlement and Landscape Archaeology. In: James D. Wright, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Vol 21. Oxford: Elsevier. pp. 654–658. Settlement pattern archaeology and the investigation of ancient landscapes, especially when systematically implemented, have been some of the most significant archaeological innovations of the last half century. These studies have shed new light on the emergence of hierarchically organized and urban societies in regions around the world, while also providing new perspectives on the history of human–environmental interactions. This article reviews the roots of these regional archaeological approaches, their theoretical underpinnings, and some of the key empirical contributions.
Bulletin of the History of Archaeology, 1997
and Daniel Miller have in common? What are the relationships between McGuire's A MarxistArchaeology (1992) and Zen and the Art of Mo to rcycle Ma intenance (persig 1974)1 If you like the conjunction of paradigms from philosophy and psychology, reflections upon science and the humanities, refreshing reconsiderations of the processual and post-processual debates, and mental gymnastics, you will undoubtedly enjoy a majority of the essays found in this unique book. The goal of this volume is to reflect upon recent theoretical issues in archaeology. The commentators are, in the main, practicing archaeologists educated in the British tradition with substantial backgrounds in social anthropology, social theory, and philosophy. Therefore, some North American-trained anthropological anthropologists may find the scope of this interesting and introspective volume uncustomary and controver sial, perhaps even disjointed and diffused. The work goes beyond the "Old" and "New" Archaeology para digms, modernism. and post-modernism, objectivist and processual versus contextualist and post process ualist approaches, as well as other theoretical (and methodological) dichotomies. A majority of the authors are concerned about the major debates on archaeological theory that have taken place during the past two decades-for example, science and interpretation, and processualism and post-process ualism. Likewise, the papers concern the interr elationships of archaeology and contemporary social theory and draw from philosophy, the structure of science, gender studies, and ethics, among other humanities and social and physical sciences. In sum, the book engages an important question: Has contemporary theory in archaeology moved from constructive, "progressive" dialogues to a series of defensive, intractable positions or "pos tures?" Mackenzie also states that the idea that archaeologists " ... can disengage their personal, social, and political context from their work must also be construed as posturing" (p. 26). There are many fresh voices and divergent opinions presenting some invigorating ideas and challenging theoreticians of archaeological discourse.
Recent Trends in Archaeological Theory: Some Comments
Iranian Journal of Archaeological Studies, 2016
This paper is a selective review of some recent themes in archaeological theory since c.2000. It deals first with a philosophical pragmatism and its application to archaeological thought and practice. The paper then examines a turn to materiality, sometimes glossed as an 'ontological turn', and its implications for different aspects of theory and practice. Thirdly, the paper discusses the understanding the past in the context of the present and the need for archaeology to maintain and extend its engagement with issues of diversity. The argument of the paper concludes with some reflective comments on the author's Archaeological Theory: An Introduction, first published in 1999, in advance of the third revised edition. Two key themes in this reflection are first, issues arising from a pluralism and democracy of interpretation, and second, the tension between a generalizing survey of 'world archaeology' and the need to acknowledge and develop perspectives situated within diverse local contexts.
Settlement archaeology is the study of the selection criteria of settlements in the landscape, interrelationships between cities and their rural surroundings, the impact of human occupation on the natural environment etc. in the past. It can also be described as 'landscape archaeology', which is basically focuses on the ways in which past people constructed and used the environment around them. The study of settlement archaeology or landscape archaeology has evolved to understand how landscapes were used to create and reinforce social inequality in past human culture. The study can be as small as a single household or garden or as large as an empire. Many methods are used in Settlement archaeology. These include pollen analysis, Geographic Information Systems, soil sampling, faunal analysis etc. Pollen, soil, faunal, and floral analysis allows the archaeologist to understand the natural vegetation of an area, vegetation that was actively grown by inhabitants, and the animal life that also lived in the area. An understanding of the plant and animal life specific to an area can lead to an analysis of the types of food available to members of the community, an understanding of the actual diet typical for a subset of a population, and site and skeletal dating.
Towards Archaeological Theory: a History
The Power of Reason, the Matter of Prehistory. Papers in Honour of Antonio Gilman Guillén, 2020
Díaz-Andreu, Margarita. 2020. "Towards Archaeological Theory: a history." In The Power of Reason, the Matter of Prehistory. Papers in Honour of Antonio Gilman Guillén, edited by Pedro Díaz-del-Río, Katina Lillios, & Inés Sastre, 41-53. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. ABSTRACT - This article provides a historical overview of the interest in archaeological methods and theory. Starting with nineteenth-century positivism, attention will be paid to a preoccupation with methods at the turn of the century and the appearance of a focus on theory in the 1930s. Moving from the UK to the US, the proposals made by the generations preceding the appearance of the New Archaeology paradigm in the 1940s and 1950s will be briefly described. The context that made possible the emergence of the New Archaeology is then explained and sorne ideas about when its might began to diminish will also be given. The ultimate aim of this article is to serve as a context for understanding the situation of theoretical archaeology at the time in which Antonio Gilman learned about the profession and practiced it. The article finishes with sorne thoughts on archaeological paradigms. CONTENT: Introduction | Positivism, friendships, and methods | From method to theory – from Europe to America | The vital, ingenious and imaginative generation of the late 1930s and 1940s | ‘Fast and furious’ changes: the 1950s | New Archaeology | A brief note about New Archaeology’s aftermath | Conclusion |
Contemporary Issues in Archaeological Theory
This course explores how archaeologists make sense of the world from artifacts of the past. Human practices and cultural processes resonate, live within the material traces that surround us in our everyday life. How do archaeologists re-imagine these traces as residues of real people in history rather than imaginary beings and ghosts? How do archaeologists place material objects and spaces in the context of human practices, cultural processes and long-term history? In short, we will read, think and write about archaeological ways of thinking about the world. Archaeology, as a modern discipline, investigates the past through the study of its material remains. This material record is documented and interpreted through various intellectual activities from fieldwork to publication. But archaeologists are usually torn between their work in the field (digging, surveying, drawing, travelling, taking notes) and in their academic environment (processing data, interpreting, publishing). Throughout the semester we will spend some thought on this divided life between the field and discourse, and explore some of the novel attempts have been made to bridge them. Archaeology frequently becomes entangled with our daily lives through its politicized engagement with the past and issues of identity. We will examine various theoretical approaches and historiographic models used in archaeology since its inception in the 19th century, while putting a particular emphasis on the recent developments in the theories and methodologies in archaeology in the last few decades. It is intended to provide a solid theoretical and historigraphic basis for the discipline of archaeology. The first few weeks of the course will be dedicated to discussing the central movements in the discipline such as culture-history, New Archaeology, and contextual archaeology, while the second half deals with more contemporary theoretical paradigms such as gender and sexuality, technology and agency, space, place and landscape, and issues of cultural heritage. Particular archaeological materials, sites, projects will be used in discussing the potentials and disadvantages of various approaches. Archaeological case studies will be drawn mostly from the ancient Western Asian and Mediterranean worlds.