Political economy and archaeology: Perspectives on exchange and production

Traditional approaches to the study of political economy are flawed in two respects. First, traditional approaches have submerged political economy within a discussion of political development and the evolution of complex society. Second, they have emphasized single dimensions of the economy such as production or distribution of resources as being the basis for political power. Current research has demonstrated that political economies are a mix of many different resource mobilization strategies that crosscut the production, service, and distribution sectors of the society. Archaeologists must attempt to identify this mix of strategies as a first step in reconstructing the structure of prehistoric political economy. Elites strive to control and mobilize resources from as many different sources as possible and invoke a common set of principles in doing so. These principles or components of the political economy are the accumulation, context, matrix control, and ideology principles. They are identified here as common mechanisms of resource creation, manipulation, and expropriation that can be applied to societies at different times and at different levels of organization.     

Settlement models in archaeology

Theory, taken phenomenologically, relates to what it is about not as an equation or a rendering, but as a logos which lets something be seen which is then seen on its own.     

Post-medieval archaeology in Portugal

Abstract

Portuguese post-medieval archaeology corresponds to the period between the early 16th century and the late 18th century, identified in the archaeological record through several distinct artefact categories, of which ceramics are the most abundant. New products such as thin-walled moulded coarsewares and faience are found together with imports from different European countries, China and other Eastern lands. Although sites and finds are mentioned in Portuguese archaeological and art-historical literature from the late 19th century, it only became a scientific discipline in the 1980s. This paper aims to provide a general view of investigations in post-medieval archaeology for more than a century, focusing on contexts and finds, but also looking towards the discipline’s future.     

Revolutionary archaeology in Cuba

The Revolution of 1959 brought forth changes in the mission, theoretical orientation, and organization of archaeology in Cuba and created a role for, and constraints on, the profession that are unique in the Western Hemisphere. This paper draws upon examples from substantive field and laboratory research to examine the methods and theoretical perspectives of Cuban archaeology since the Revolution, focusing on the period from 1962 until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Archaeological practice during the Revolutionary period in Cuba has reflected the aims of the Revolutionary government, the influence of Soviet archaeology, the legacy of pre-Revolutionary approaches in North American archaeology, and the Cuban sense ofpatria.     

Experimental archaeology in Denmark

When experimental archaeology began 100–150 years ago, it was carried out scientifically alongside regular archaeology. However, while general archaeology has continued intensively, scientific experimental archaeology has continued very sporadically during this century. The fact that there is a considerable amount of so‐called ‘experimental archaeology’ does not mean that it has been carried out scientifically. This is exemplified by house reconstructions, which despite their great number have only in a few cases added something new to archaeological research. Although these particular house reconstructions serve a pedagogic function, it would be better if, instead, scientific education was made available in the area of experimental archaeology.     

Evolutionary approaches in archaeology

Two evolutionary approaches in contemporary archaeology, selectionism and processualism, are compared in terms of their theoretical perspectives, methodologies, and empirical contributions. Selectionism is a tightly focused approach that aims to apply a strict Darwinian framework to the study of cultural evolution. The selectionists view cultural evolution as a shift in the relative frequencies of cultural traits; the evolutionary mechanism that brings this about entails undirected variation followed by selection in a manner analogous to biological evolution. Processualism is a more flexible approach that acknowledges the importance of variation and selection but employs these concepts in a broader framework that recognizes fundamental differences between cultural and biological evolution. Among them are the central roles played by directed variation and the hierarchical operation of selection in cultural evolution. As we enter the late 1990s, the selectionists appear comfortably ascendant while the processualists often seem in disarray—they appear less confident, more embattled, more internally diverse. This diversity and dynamism, however, may harbor great potential for further growth and development. It is suggested that processualism's ongoing ferment will spawn the evolutionary archaeology of the future.     

Paradigms in science and archaeology

The paradigm concept as developed in western philosophy of science contexts is reviewed, and the metaphysical paradigms that govern research protocols in mainstream Old and New World prehistoric archaeology are described and compared. It is concluded that post-1970 New World archaeological research receives its intellectual mandate from anthropology, is founded on postpositivist biases, and is governed by a critical-realist ontology, a modified-objectivist epistemology, and an experimental-manipulative methodology. Post-1970 Old World archaeological research is viewed as a kind of history, remains mostly in the strict empiricist tradition, and is governed by a realist ontology, an inductivist epistemology, and by an observational methodology. The claims of various kinds of postprocessual archaeology are also evaluated in terms of the paradigm concept.     

Recent publications in historical archaeology

Historical Archaeology -     

Recent publications in historical archaeology

Historical Archaeology -     

Dating problems in Icelandic archaeology

For many decades tephrochronology has been used as a scientific method for dating archaeological as well as geological remains in Iceland. Recently, parts of the tephrochronology for the eruptions of the famous volcano Hekla have been questioned by the author. This is due to obvious differences in dating results of archaeological artefacts from the valley of Thjórsárdalur in southern Iceland and the current tephrochronological dating of its devastation. While the devastation of the valley has been dated to AD 1104 and is thought to have been caused by a huge eruption of mount Hekla in that year, the artefacts from excavations and stray finds, as well as new ¹⁴C results, show somewhat later 12th‐13th century dates. The paper deals with this obvious discrepancy, which has hitherto been ignored, together with the results of archaeological excavations in 1983–86 at Stóng in Thjórsárdalur; it also gives a critical analysis of the historical methodology of the tephrochronologists.     

Human remains in marine archaeology

Abstract

This paper deals with human remains in marine contexts, both from the intertidal zone and from below low water mark. Some of the legal and ethical aspects pertaining to human remains are discussed, with an emphasis on the English experience. Survival of human remains in marine environments is considered, and recovery procedures in fieldwork projects are discussed. Finally, drawing upon work from Britain and from other parts of Europe, particularly on remains from wreck sites, attempts are made to discern some of the more important directions for research on human remains from marine archaeological contexts.     

Middle-range theory,behavioral archaeology,and postempiricist philosophy of science in archaeology

This paper examines middle-range theory (MRT) within processual and postprocessual archaeology. An analysis of the Binford-Schiffer dispute serves as a means of clarifying what MRT in processual archaeology is or is intended to be. Postprocessualists, despite their vigorous criticisms of MRT-based approaches, are found to rely on the same resources and types of reasoning to make their inferences. In their practice they tacitly turn to processualist middle-range principles, and so the justification of postprocessual interpretations is equivalent to that of MRT-based processualist models. If the middle range is functionally defined — a space within a research program occupied by varying theories that are taken from the body of general theory to which the program is committed and that function as background knowledge in the verification of theories — MRT bridges the epistemological gap between processual and postprocessual approaches.     

Approaches to style in lithic archaeology

A key issue in lithic archaeology is how to identify the respective roles played by ethnicity and activity—that is, style and function—in the formal variation exhibited by stone tools. This paper argues that style is most profitably regarded as the ethnic idiom imparted to lithic technology in each and all of its aspects due to the culture-historical context of its manufacture and employment. Style is thus a full complement of function, and it is to be looked for wherever artisans encounter options of form and use to “choose” from in pursuing a given task. Because it equates ethnicity with functionally equivalent choice, this is labeled the isochrestic approach to style. Contrasted to this is the iconological approach, which restricts style solely to those aspects of formal variation that artisans purposefully invest with symbolic content reflecting self-conscious social groups. Pottery decoration appears to reveal such investment and therefore ceramic sociology is a feasible enterprise. However, a parallel iconological approach to stone tools is much less promising. At least as it is exemplified by the writings of Lewis Binford, lithic sociology would seem to have little substantive grounding in the relevant empirical data, to be argued within what may be an unsound theoretical frame (including the distinction between curative and expedient technologies), and in any case to resist translation into a workable analytic machinery. Not least among the reasons for this last is the fact that stone tools do not possess formal variation wherein iconologically significant investment can be objectively identified and defined. The archaeological frame of reference within which the isochrestic and iconological approaches are discussed is largely contributed by the classic Paleolithic sequence of the Perigord region of southwestern France.     

Bone stable isotope studies in archaeology

Stable isotope ratios of carbon and nitrogen in bone have become increasingly frequent inclusions in archaeological reports over the past few decades. The majority of such studies has been done in North America, where the use of marine foods and the introduction of maize have been monitored. Similar questions have been addressed in Mesoamerica and South America. In Europe, stable isotope ratios have documented the shift from marine fishing and gathering to agriculture in coastal areas and the introduction of millet in parts of eastern and southern Europe. Much work remains to be done in Asia, where millet replaced early C3 plant foods and, in turn, was replaced by rice. In Africa marine adaptations, freshwater fishing, agriculture, and pastoralism all yield diagnostic isotopic signatures. We review these studies, discuss areas requiring further study, and close with discussions of areas promising interesting future developments.