Introduction: The Materiality of Traces and Legacies

This Special Issue presents issues in contemporary archaeological theory and practice as influenced by the work of H. Martin Wobst. Wobst came to study in the U.S. nearly 50 years ago and has contributed to many changes in the theory and practice of archaeology since then. Though the papers cover a wide range of topics they share common interests in seeing materiality as constitutive of culture, archaeologists as participants in the present as well as observers of the past, and an interest in transcending traditional definitions of archaeological research.     

Mortuary practices: Their social,philosophical-religious,circumstantial, and physical determinants

Recent, mainstream, American mortuary archaeology, in its paradigmatic outlook, middle-range theory, analytic methodology, and case studies, has emphasized social organization as the primary factor that determines mortuary practices. Broader anthropological and social science traditions have recognized philosophical-religious beliefs as additional, important determinants. The historical roots of mortuary archaeology's focus on the social, and the consequence of this on theory development, is reviewed. Then, through a Human Relations Area Files (HRAF) cross-cultural survey, the kinds of philosophical-religious, social organizational, circumstantial, and physical factors that affect specific kinds of mortuary practices, and the relative importance of these factors, are documented. The data are also used to test basic premises that mortuary archaeologists routinely use today to reconstruct social organization. A balanced, more holistic, and multidisciplinary approach, which considers many kinds of causes beyond social ones, is found necessary to interpret mortuary remains and to reconstruct the past from them.     

Bridging the Gap: Classification,Theory and Practice in Public Archaeology

Models and classifications have been a part of thinking about public archaeology since at least the early 2000s, but how are these ideas translated into practice? By looking into the development of such classifications and models and by examining archaeologists’ attitudes to an archaeological education outreach project for schoolchildren in Oslo, Norway, this paper looks at the relationship between classification, theory, and practice in public archaeology.     

WHAT DOES MORTUARY VARIABILITY IN THE OHIO VALLEY MIDDLE WOODLAND MEAN? AGENCY,ITS PROJECTS,AND INTERPRETIVE AMBIGUITY

Building on what I view as the inability of archaeologists to distinguish patterning in the treatment of the dead in the central Ohio Valley Middle Woodland (Adena and Hopewell combined), I suggest an interpretive shift to focus instead upon agency; that is, upon mortuary events as the products of individuals and teams performing ritual acts using relics of their dead. That said, the remains we interpret as persona become, in effect, the “abandoned projects” of that agency, and their interpretation in the archaeological contexts we excavate (accretional mounds and other forms of mortuary features) is hedged around with what I call interpretive ambiguity. This approach embraces what we see as the extreme mortuary variability characteristic of the time and place without denying that underlying mortuary beliefs were real and conservative. Rather, it focuses upon the interpretation of place and how historical events occurring in places reflect larger social interactions.     

Archaeology’s quest for a seat at the high table of anthropology

Between 1900 and 1970, American archaeologists perceived themselves as second-class anthropologists because the archaeological record suggested little not already known ethnographically, archaeology served anthropology by testing ethnologically derived models of cultural evolution, the archaeological record was ethnologically incomplete as a result of poor preservation, and archaeologists used but did not write anthropological theory. Ethnologists of the period agreed with these points and regularly reminded archaeologists of their limited role in anthropology. A few archaeologists claimed in the 1950s that archaeology could contribute to anthropological theory but they were ignored. The claim was reiterated by new archaeologists of the 1960s, and by the 1970s worries about the poor preservation of the archaeological record had softened. However, most archaeologists after 1970 (and before 1990) used anthropological theory and did not write new theory on the basis of archaeological data. The root cause of American archaeology’s ninety-year absence from anthropology’s high table of theory seems to be the discipline-wide retention of the ninety-year old belief that archaeology is prehistoric ethnology and the (unnecessary and constraining) corollary that archaeologists must use anthropological theory to explain the archaeological record.     

Consuming the Past: Public Perceptions towards the Discipline of Archaeology in Zimbabwe

This paper discusses the public perceptions of archaeology and the information that archaeologists produce in Zimbabwe. There have been accusations that archaeologists in various parts of the world research for themselves. The products of archaeological research are often presented in academic jargon only accessible to those in the profession. Archaeological research in developing countries has been criticized for having limited involvement, if any, with the local communities in which it is conducted, and fails to address development issues that are important and much more relevant to the concerned societies. The paper discusses the extent to which these accusations are justified in Zimbabwe, focusing on the perceptions that local communities have on archaeology, archaeologists, archaeological remains, archaeological research, and institutions dealing with archaeological cultural heritage in that country. It also discusses why it seems difficult to put into practice some of the suggestions that have been made in the past on how to engage with the public. The paper argues that, although there have been efforts to change the situation, southern African archaeology in general and specifically its practice in Zimbabwe remains largely a preserve of the initiated. It concludes by recommending that writing on archaeological issues be accessible and that research issues should have social relevance. Awareness of local communities in research, outreach activities to schools, and the benefits of archaeological resources for local communities, are crucial means by which the value of the discipline can be appreciated by the public.     

Re-visiting the field: Collaborative archaeology as paradigm shift

Abstract

The emphasis of the JFA on field methods resonates strongly with current disciplinary interest in multivocality and participatory research. In this new epistemology of inclusiveness, communities play an active role in the production of archaeological knowledge as well as in the conservation of cultural heritage. From the perspective of archaeologists trained in the U.S. who conduct research in Latin America, we historicize changes in the triadic relationship among archaeologists, contemporary communities, and things of the past. This examination focuses on the evolving social context of archaeological practice. The social milieu within which archaeology is conducted is explored further by reference to a recent survey of archaeologists that elicited comments on grand challenges to archaeology. A few examples of the many forms that an engaged archaeology might take are offered from the Maya region. Although collaborative research poses challenges that emerge as communities entangled with archaeological practice become research partners, we suggest that the enhanced relevance that accompanies this transformation is well worth the effort.     

考古发掘与考古发现

考古发现和考古学理论方法是考古学赖以进步的两条腿。考古发现不断刷新考古学家的视野并为考古学研究的深入提供新的资料,考古学理论方法使考古学的眼睛更加明亮,分析和思考更具有科学的力量。理论方法让考古学家对考古发现有更深入的认识,考古发现同时也推动综合研究和理论方法的进步。此外,考古发现往往会引起社会的关注,考古发现和考古学知识的普及可以为考古学的进步提供良好的社会环境,从而对考古学的发展产生强大的推动力量。考古学的持续发展要求考古学家必须正确处理考古发现、考古学自身理论方法的完善以及考古学与化遗产保护、公众知识状况和社会需求的关系。     

Hunter-gatherer burials and the creation of persistent places in southeastern Australia

One of the difficulties in interpreting hunter-gatherer mortuary practices is that many mortuary theories are derived from sedentary societies and rely upon an excavated record. This paper is an analysis of both historical and archaeological evidence of Aboriginal burial practices in the Murray River region of southeastern Australia. The archaeological data relies primarily upon analysis of burials exposed through erosion rather than systematic excavations which limits the range of burial characteristics that may be recorded and interpreted. The mortuary practices identified are highly patterned but regionally and locally variable. It is argued that the evidence demonstrates the persistence of place for Aboriginal people. The existence of persistent places is further related to a potentially fluid but structured connection between people and land.     

The Direct Historical Approach, Analogical Reasoning, and Theory in Americanist Archaeology

Prior to the early 1950s, Americanist archaeologists, given their interest in chronology, routinely searched for direct historical connections between ethnographically documented cultures and archaeological cultures. In those instances where clear evolutionary connections existed between ethnographic and prehistoric cultures, the ethnic affinities of the latter could be assessed, chronologies of prehistoric cultures could be built, and ethnographic descendant cultures could be used as analogs of prehistoric ancestral cultures. The latter became known as specific historical analogy, and it stands in contrast to general comparative analogy, in which no detectable evolutionary connection exists between archaeological subjects and ethnographic sources. The theory underpinning the use of specific historical analogs is Darwinian evolutionism, or descent with modification; thus similarities between ethnographic sources and archaeological subjects are homologous. By midcentury, with the problem of chronology behind them, archaeologists began to address anthropological concerns. Darwinian evolutionism was replaced by the theory of orthogenesis as an explanation of culture change, and concomitantly specific historical analogy was replaced by general comparative analogy, in which similarities between ethnographic sources and archaeological subjects are the result of convergence. For over a century anthropologists and archaeologists have mixed elements of the two theories.     

Places in Interaction: The National Archaeological Park Project as an Integrated Approach to Public Archaeology in China

The aim of this paper is to re-examine how concepts of public archaeology have been established and developed in varying social and political contexts in China, and how the recent national archaeological park project is structured as an important approach for improving public-archaeology relationships and promoting the public uses of archaeology. Since all archaeological activities in China are exclusively regulated by the state, all archaeological resources are administered for the benefit of the public. As such, concepts of public archaeology demonstrate the efforts of Chinese archaeologists to re-evaluate public-archaeology relationships and uses of archaeology through public engagement as well as archaeological communications with the public. The national archaeological park project was launched in 2006 to expand the practice of archaeology with the creation of archaeological communications, public space, and community-driven programmes. The project facilitates multiple perspectives on public archaeology practice through public education, community cohesion, re-creation of public space, and local economic development.     

An Anthropological Archaeologist: The Contributions of William A. Longacre to Archaeological Theory,Method, and Practice

Of the “new archaeologists” who developed social models for prehistoric organization, William A. Longacre was a pioneer. Here, we review his contributions and the role he played in expanding archaeological method, theory, and practice. His innovative work in the American Southwest involving ceramic sociology was emulated, critiqued, and extended by several generations of archaeologists. Recognizing the concerns raised by this early work, Longacre developed one of the most successful ethnoarchaeological projects in the world among the Kalinga of northern Luzon in the Philippines. His work and that of his students and colleagues examined multiple, inter-connected aspects of ceramic variability linked to a variety of social, technological, functional, and economic processes. Kalinga data and analyses continue to inform archaeological practices and conclusions. Throughout his career, Longacre mentored archaeologists in both the USA and the Philippines, extending his influence geographically and establishing himself as one of the most important practitioners of processual archaeology.     

现代中国环境考古研究模式的分析

本文将1987年以来的中国环境考古研究称为"现代中国环境考古研究",并将之归纳为"考古地理的环境考古研究模式"、"文化历史环境考古研究模式"和"资源环境考古研究模式"。本文对这三种研究模式的合理性进行了分析。接下来,从考古学的基本理论假设出发,指出环境考古学、文化历史考古学之间并没有严格的继承关系,中国环境考古研究的最大问题是核心概念的不匹配。最后,通过考察西方环境考古研究和考古学史,本文提出应该用文化适应,即"考古学中的文化"取代考古学文化而将之作为核心概念进行环境考古研究,让中国环境考古摆脱文化历史考古学概念体系的束缚。     

The Archaeology of Immateriality

Despite changes in archaeological theory and practice over the past 40 years, most archaeologists are still not very good at acknowledging that “significance” is context-dependent and non-material. In this paper I present two cases studies from New England where archaeologists collaborated with Native peoples on sites that had significant preservation concerns. I evaluate to what extent these projects were successful in their goal of decolonizing archaeology. I call for a definition of materiality that acknowledges that tangible objects and their intangible contexts and meanings are inextricable, and that values are continuously created and recreated in the present by a variety of memory communities.     

Geographic Visualization in Archaeology

Archaeologists are often considered frontrunners in employing spatial approaches within the social sciences and humanities, including geospatial technologies such as geographic information systems (GIS) that are now routinely used in archaeology. Since the late 1980s, GIS has mainly been used to support data collection and management as well as spatial analysis and modeling. While fruitful, these efforts have arguably neglected the potential contribution of advanced visualization methods to the generation of broader archaeological knowledge. This paper reviews the use of GIS in archaeology from a geographic visualization (geovisual) perspective and examines how these methods can broaden the scope of archaeological research in an era of more user-friendly cyber-infrastructures. Like most computational databases, GIS do not easily support temporal data. This limitation is particularly problematic in archaeology because processes and events are best understood in space and time. To deal with such shortcomings in existing tools, archaeologists often end up having to reduce the diversity and complexity of archaeological phenomena. Recent developments in geographic visualization begin to address some of these issues and are pertinent in the globalized world as archaeologists amass vast new bodies of georeferenced information and work towards integrating them with traditional archaeological data. Greater effort in developing geovisualization and geovisual analytics appropriate for archaeological data can create opportunities to visualize, navigate, and assess different sources of information within the larger archaeological community, thus enhancing possibilities for collaborative research and new forms of critical inquiry.     

Digging for the Dead: Archaeological Practice as Mortuary Commemoration

Abstract

Archaeologists have yet to fully appreciate the complex interactions between archaeological practice and contemporary responses towards death and commemoration in the UK. The paper reflects upon the experience of working with the local community during archaeological fieldwork in and around an English country churchyard at Stokenham in the South Hams district of Devon in southwest England during 2005 and 2006. Using this case study, it is argued that the current theories and parameters of both mortuary archaeology and public archaeology fail to adequately engage with the diverse community perceptions and concerns over mortality and commemoration. At Stokenham, the archaeological research and student-training programme engaged local people in the discovery of their past but (more importantly for the local community) also helped to secure an acceptable commemorative future. It is argued that this provides a case study of how archaeological practice can interact with community attitudes to death and memory.     

?Doing Archaeology?: cultural heritage management and its role in identifying the link between archaeological practice and theory

Using a case study of the recent history of archaeology in Australia, the paper details how Cultural Heritage Management, in addition to protecting the archaeological data base, actually protects archaeological access to it. In offering this protection, archaeologists involved in Cultural Heritage Management become the regulators of archaeological practice and theory. Here archaeology comes into direct contact and conflict with governments and a range of interest groups, notably the Aboriginal community, with a stake in material culture. In effect 'doing' Cultural Heritage Management is 'doing' archaeology.     

AD536 – BACK TO NATURE?

A spate of archaeological, historical and scientific publications have recently argued that the dust veil from a volcanic eruption (or series of eruptions) caused climatic change, which ‘forced’ significant historical transformations in the middle of the sixth century AD. In this paper, I situate this phenomenon within a more general return to environmental determinism in archaeological explanation, a return which itself needs to be understood in the context both of contemporary fears about the devastation to be unleashed by the climatic change we have made, and of the rise of precise measurement in environmental and archaeological science. I do not doubt the reality of the climatic change reconstructed for AD536/546 but, given the coarseness of the dating of the historical transformations, I do question the causal connections drawn between the former and the latter. I suggest that for many archaeologists, the AD536 event (and similar phenomena) functions much as written texts once did – as both the framework for analysis and as the explanation of historical process.     

The Polish contribution to protection of the archaeological heritage in central south Iraq,November 2003 to April 2005

Abstract

Iraq is the cradle of modern civilization, the land of ancient Mesopotamia, and thus unparalleled in its wealth of heritage sites. For years, with its strong Antiquities Law and its professional State Board of Antiquities and Heritage, Iraq protected its antiquities successfully. But since the beginning of the 1990s, many archaeological sites have been looted. Following the Second Gulf War (2003) the Polish government has attempted to assist Iraq. Since November 2003 the Polish Ministry of Culture has been delegating archaeologists for purposes of documentation, intervention and protection of the archaeological monuments located in the central southern part of Iraq, the core land of ancient Babylonia and Sumer. In close cooperation with Iraqi archaeologists, twenty-four projects valued at US$680,000 have been implemented between January 2004 and April 2005, involving aerial and ground reconnaissance and salvage recording of the most threatened archaeological sites. The Polish team has also conducted education and awareness training of the Coalition forces detachments to promote respect for heritage.     

Damaged Burials or <Emphasis Type="Italic">Reliquiae Cogotenses?</Emphasis> On the Accompanying Human Bones in Burial Pits Belonging to the Iberian Bronze Age

Social Sciences and Humanities are increasingly interested in the relationship between society and material culture, and archaeology can provide, among other contributions, its chronological depth and the variability and certain regularities in mortuary rituals. In this respect, archaeological literature frequently cites cases of a few human bones redeposited at mortuary sites, often burials of adults accompanied by some bones of an infant, but without a clear pattern being discernable. In contrast, research on the Bronze Age Cogotas I archaeological culture in the Iberian Peninsula (MBA and LBA, ca. 1800–1100 cal BC) has identified what seems to be an emerging pattern: primary burials of very young children accompanied by the bone of an adult, possibly female, who had died before, even long before, as the statistical analysis of the radiocarbon dates of the individuals involved appears to corroborate. This may therefore be a ritualised mortuary practice that included bone relics, but its explanation is not simple, due to the polysemic nature of such relics. The creation and maintenance of real or fictitious kinship ties, a special protection for dead infants, possible gender aspects, ideas about fertility and renewal, strengthening interpersonal relationships, legitimisation of emerging inequality, etc., are some of the possible components of this social practice which was until now unknown in the Iberian prehistory, but also little known in other areas in European prehistory.