Cross-Cultural Approaches in Archaeology: Comparative Ethnology, Comparative Archaeology, and Archaeoethnology

Cross-cultural approaches have been used widely in archaeological research. Comparative ethnology has provided a number of archaeological indicators of behavior, but large segments of the archaeological record have not yet been subjected to extensive comparative analysis. Comparative archaeology has aided in exploring variation among societal types (such as chiefdoms) and categories within the archaeological record (such as settlements). Diachronic comparisons have been used frequently by archaeologists, but these have often been based on unique samples and only rarely have employed statistics to aid in the discovery or testing of hypotheses. Archaeoethnology, comparative analyses of archaeological cases employing valid samples and statistical evaluation of theories and hypotheses, is introduced.     

Archaeology, History, and Historical Archaeology in South America

This paper discusses the relationship between history and archaeology in general, their common concerns and links with historical archaeology. It deals with the development of historical archaeology in three related South American countries, Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay, and pays attention to recent trends in the theory and practice of the discipline in the area.     

Archaeology Underfoot: On-Campus Approaches to Education,Outreach, and Historical Archaeology at Brown University

This article explores the methods and outcomes of “The Archaeology of College Hill” (AoCH), a hands-on fieldwork course at Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. The first half of this paper recounts the results of a three-year research program (2012–2014) on the Quiet Green of the university’s campus. This work identified a material assemblage associated with the school’s first official President’s House and uncovered evidence for over two centuries of student life. The second half of this article addresses our pedagogical methods, including elements of replicable course design and feedback from a qualitative survey on students’ impressions of the class. By situating this project within wider dialogues on the role of fieldwork in undergraduate teaching, we demonstrate the ways in which practical, on-campus projects like AoCH can reach a more diverse body of students, increase enrollments in other archaeology courses, and develop a more engaged, de-centered pedagogy.