A HISTORY OF CENTRAL EUROPEAN ARCHAEOLOGY THEORY, METHODS, AND POLITICS Edited by (original) (raw)
Related papers
This paper introduces a Special Issue of the journal Anthropologie based on the papers that were presented at the conference Theory and Method in the Prehistoric Archaeology of Central Europe, which was held in 2012 in Mikulov, Czech Republic. The papers cover a wide range of theoretical and methodological themes related to prehistory of Central Europe. Themes covered in this issue include human-environmental interactions, signifikance of artefacts, long-term processes, and reflexivity. Despite the diverse nature of the papers, there are two common threads emerging in this Special Issue. The first one is the relationship between archaeology and other disciplines and the second one is the tension between national archaeological traditions and internationalisation of archaeological practise. We argue that Central Europe is well suited for the exchange of ideas related to archaeological theory and methodology because of its geography and history. It is the space where various archaeologies and archaeologists can meet, present their arguments, negotiate their theoretical positions, and produce new knowledge.
Prehistoric archaeology in Central Europe: Beyond diversity
This paper introduces a Special Issue of the journal Anthropologie based on the papers that were presented at the conference Theory and Method in the Prehistoric Archaeology of Central Europe, which was held in 2012 in Mikulov, Czech Republic. The papers cover a wide range of theoretical and methodological themes related to prehistory of Central Europe. Themes covered in this issue include human-environmental interactions, significance of artefacts, long-term processes, and reflexivity. Despite the diverse nature of the papers, there are two common threads emerging in this Special Issue. The first one is the relationship between archaeology and other disciplines and the second one is the tension between national archaeological traditions and internationalisation of archaeological practise. We argue that Central Europe is well suited for the exchange of ideas related to archaeological theory and methodology because of its geography and history. It is the space where various archaeologies and archaeologists can meet, present their arguments, negotiate their theoretical positions, and produce new knowledge.
Th eory?' at the 2006 EAA meeting in Krakow I felt the need to argue from a perspective diff erent from theirs: that of an archaeologist socialised into the German tradition. Th is tradition is rooted fi rmly in a distinctive Central European Archaeology. Imagine a German archaeologist talking about the death of theory -would not that be anachronistic? Th ings obviously are more problematic and tangled where theory in Central European Archaeology is concerned. Th us, this paper will fi rst address the questions what 'Central European Archaeology' is supposed to mean, and how this particular way of doing archaeology is associated with or approaches theory. Th is, in turn, requires us to talk about what 'theory' does or may mean, and how it is related to practice. I will add some thoughts on refl exive approaches to theory/practice. What are current debates among Central European archaeologists revealing about attitudes towards both 'our real aims' and the methodologies that might be appropriate to achieve them? Before attempting theory's life in Central Europe we should ask: what is it that we ought to kill? Is theory alive at all?
Breaking New Ground: Historical Archaeology in Central Europe.
In: N. Mehler (ed.), Historical Archaeology in Central Europe. Society of Historical Archaeology, Special Publication No 10 (Rockville 2013) pp. 11-31., 2013
This article attempts to outline and conceptualize the origins, academic parameters, and practical fields of activity of historical archaeology in central Europe and its individual countries. It is obvious that such a complex variety of linguistic, geographical, historical, cultural, religious, and political features within central Europe would also have been reflected in the archaeological research traditions upon which the emerging field of historical archaeology is based. In my view, two kinds of historical archaeology exist in central Europe that hark back to these different traditions and influences. From a methodological point of view, I have provocatively chosen to differentiate between archaeology of the modern era and historical archaeology. Apart from this dichotomy, historical archaeology in central Europe is also characterized by a wealth of subjects and methods, which we should view as an opportunity rather than a burden.
Historical Observations on European Archaeology
In the second half of the nineteenth century, prehistoric archaeology came into existence in Europe (Daniel 1964:9). Since then numerous excavations have been conducted, thousands of publications covering various topics have been published, and new theories and methods have been applied to archaeological research. From a small number of pioneering scholars the profession has grown to include the thousands of men and women who are responsible for the present standing of archaeology in Europe. Unfortunately histories of archaeology do not treat all archaeologists equally. Each archaeologist writing the history of the field chooses his/her examples of events and personalities, so a totally unbiased perspective does not exist. Most archaeologists would agree that Marija Gimbutas was a famous archaeologist (Milisauskas 2000); however, in Trigger's (1989), A History of Archaeological Thought, she was not included. A list of archaeologists associated with greatness may be quite different in England from one in Russia.
Past Presenting. Questions of science in European archaeology since 1995
European Association of Archaeologists, 2020
Some personal reflections on archaeology, 25 years after the first meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists in 1995. This is a talk I gave at the online meetings of the European Association of Archaeologists in August 2020. It was part of a session convened by Felipe Criado-Boado and Kristian Kristiansen, who had been organizers of the meetings in Santiago de Compostela in 1995. They asked contributors to reflect upon 25 years of change in European Archaeology. I have been immensely influenced by the extraordinary leadership and vision of Felipe and Kristian, by the welcoming humanism of so many members of the EAA. My talk explores how we might conceive an archaeology that is centered upon community, collegiality, dialogue, in working with what remains of the past to build a better future.