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.     

Ceramics, Ethnohistory, and Ethnography: Locating Meaning in Southern African Iron Age Ceramic Assemblages

For ceramics to be relevant in the Southern African Iron Age, archaeologists must broaden their theoretical base to include social and other contexts when interpreting material culture items such as pottery. Pottery remains critical in understanding cultural dynamics in the region for the past two millennia, but current usage is narrow in scope. Using ethnohistorical data and archaeological examples from South Africa and Zimbabwe, we argue that pottery provides valuable information on the region's Iron Age, if archaeologists address the social meaning of ceramic assemblages. Ceramic production among rural communities provides the basis on which a wide range of social issues are discussed and used to critique pottery recovered from archaeology. Ethnography suggests that ceramic assemblages are context specific, and archaeologists are cautioned against making generic statements on the basis of similarities of vessel shape and decoration motif.     

The Archeologists, the Military and the Law

In less than a decade, archaeologists have seen the discipline increasingly entangled in the thriving dispute concerning the political and ethical responsibility the profession has to face, in the context of contemporary armed conflict. The recent western military interventions, in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East, ensured many archaeologists and heritage professionals became more involved with military institutions. This trend was counterbalanced by the fact that other members of the academic community strongly distanced themselves from this professional choice, challenging their colleagues on ethical grounds. This paper will put the debate in a wider context, and analyse the issue from several angles, in-order to understand whether a new conceptual framework could be of help in the analysis of this ethical dilemma. The intention is to explore if, when, and under what circumstances, archaeologists should get involved with the military to protect cultural heritage. This exploration will start with the evaluation of some of the limits and contradictions intrinsic in the ideals behind international law. Then it will move towards more contextualized and politically dense considerations and give a closer look to some possible practical solutions.     

Eating Archaeology: Experimenting with Food in Public Outreach

Public engagement is becoming increasingly common practice in archaeological projects, capitalizing on the interactions of field archaeologists with local communities as well as with the descendants of the people under study, in a variety of ways: from the use of social media to engaging the local public with onsite presentations and exhibitions. However, public engagement efforts are often less robust when archaeologists return to their home institutions, with most of the researchers’ time and energies spent fulfilling their academic duties. Interactions between archaeologists and their local communities — those closer to their home institutions — are often minimal, creating insular university departments. To secure a future as a vibrant, relevant field of research, archaeology must develop greater interest and skill in engaging with its neighbours both within and outside the academy. The study of past meals and foodways provides an exceptional avenue for public outreach, which in turn is further enhanced through fruitful collaboration among various university departments and museums. Here we present the results of the multidisciplinary outreach project ‘Eating Archaeology’, designed with the intention of building collaborations across disciplines and a new narrative with which to engage the public.     

Archaeology, Development and Conflict: A Case Study from the African Continent

Apart from wars, other contexts of social conflict have recently become a setting in which archaeologists are faced with acute, sometimes armed, violence. On the African continent, a region often overlooked in discussions of “archaeology in conflict”, rapid economic development has led to several such scenes. The paper discusses a particularly poignant example from the Middle Nile valley in Sudan, where large dam projects have been met with various levels of opposition by affected populations. Local communities opposing the construction of further planned dams on the Nile are increasingly stressing ‘cultural survival’ and fear of ‘developmental genocide’ as two of their major motivations for fighting these projects. Assuming a close link between the developer and archaeological salvage missions, affected people have started to use the expulsion of salvage teams from their territory as a strategy of resistance—posing an ethical dilemma for the archaeologists who struggle to find a position in the increasingly violent controversies accompanying these contested development projects.     

广东“南澳Ⅰ号”明代沉船出水铜器腐蚀产物分析

由于海水环境中含有大量氯化物,海洋出水铜器在出水前已发生腐蚀,生成铜的氧化物及氯化物等。本文以广东"南澳Ⅰ号"明代沉船出水的22件铜器残片为研究对象,运用X-射线荧光仪(XRF)、X-射线衍射仪(XRD)和扫描电镜与能谱仪(SEM-EDS)等分析其腐蚀产物和矿物组成,结果表明腐蚀产物主要为铜的碱式氯化物,如Cu2(OH)3Cl和Cu(OH)Cl等,与国外已有研究成果类似,但Cu(OH)Cl在国外海洋出水铜器腐蚀产物中并不常见。     

西方考古学文化概念的演变

文化概念在西方考古学一个多世纪的发展历史,经历了一个从无副有．再到被扬弃的变化过程。在当代西方考古学中,“文化”已经不再是一个很重要的词汇。“风格”（style）,“认同”（identity）。“族群”（ethnicity）等概念成为西方考古学者分析考古材料区域特征的主要术语。这些术语被用来探讨物质文化所反映的区域差异和社会界限。与欧美考古学相比,中国考古学界虽然有关于文化因素分析的探讨,对文化概念本身基本上没有太多的争论,并完全错过了西方考古学过去三十年来有关风格的大讨论。西方考古学界对文化概念的扬弃过程值得中国考古界深思。     

Confessions of an Archaeological Tour Guide

This article examines the contradictions, responsibilities and opportunities that inhere when the authenticity of the tourist experience results at least in part from having an archaeologist guide. It is argued that archaeologists are always participants in tourism, through the visions of the past they offer in even the most scholarly of papers, that make their way to tourists and tour guides through a wealth of secondary literature. It is argued that, even if most are not aware of it, archaeologists are engaged with the cultural heritage industry and it would be irresponsible to try to step aside. It is argued that archaeologists should take responsible action in light of the undeniable influence of archaeologists in defining the routes and meanings of site tours.     

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.     

Balancing the Elements: An Archaeological Story

In this piece of short fiction, readers will explore the experiences of four American archaeologists as they complete an archaeological excavation impacted by laws at the local (Massachusetts State) and national (federal USA) level. All four archaeologists are in various stages of their careers in archaeology and find themselves working together for the same privatized Cultural Resource Management (CRM) firm on an unexpectedly complex and sensitive site excavation. Here readers are urged to consider how archaeologists’ previous experiences (both personal and professional) impact site excavations, and how, in turn, each project leaves an impression on an archaeological professional moving forward. They are further invited to relate the experiences of the archaeologists in the story to their own—possibly very different—experiences. While site context is key at every excavation, is the human context equally relevant?     

The Origins and Ethics of Maritime Archaeology – Part I

Abstract

For archaeologists, the principal value of prehistoric figurines is that they offer a means – however limited – into the cultures and lives of prehistoric peoples. There is a long tradition of archaeologists assuming that the figurines they unearth had a religious significance for the people who created them (since anthropomorphic figurines have a religious use in many cultures with which we are familiar). However, just as archaeologists began questioning their attribution of divine status to prehistoric figurines in the 1960s, practitioners of neopagan and goddess spiritualities – particularly those in the feminist spirituality movement – were adopting it. Moreover, in addition to describing prehistoric figurines as images of a Great Goddess who dominated prehistoric religious life, these contemporary feminist neopagans use reproductions of prehistoric figurines to inspire and enact their own spirituality. Feminist neopagan appropriation of prehistoric figurines has been problematic for many archaeologists, who quarrel – legitimately – with the conclusions feminist neopagans make about prehistory based on these artefacts. Yet, as this article argues, the contemporary religious use of prehistoric figurines should not be a matter for archaeologists to decide.     

Cultural Capital: A Manifesto for the Future

Abstract

The paper deals with public archaeology in Latin America, understood as an enquiry: who benefits from archaeology? It focuses on the relationship between archaeologists and indigenous peoples and their rights. Countries with a majority of non-Indian population traditionally excluded natives from the nation building discourse, whilst some others forged idealised natives in the so-called Indigenismo ideology. Nationalism strongly enforced national, non-native ethos and mores. Archaeologists are usually unaware of Indian issues and contract archaeology has further complicated the situation in the recent decades. Indigenous groups are often restricted by the authorities with the assistance of archaeologists. Recently though several archaeologists have been challenging oppressive discourses and practices and are now interacting with natives.     

Protrusion, Bioturbation, and Settlement Detection during Surface Survey: The Lowland Maya Case

In upland settings in humid and semihumid temperate and tropical environments, bioturbation is a major factor in the burial of modest architectural remains, which are abundant components of the settlement systems of complex societies. Surface survey, favored by archaeologists of complex societies as a settlement detection method, seldom is appropriate for discovering architectural remains buried through bioturbation. Where the focus of analysis includes settlement represented by architectural remains, surface survey is appropriate only where all or a representative sample of all types of architectural remains are protrusive. Protrusion describes a relationship (affected by climate, environment, topography, and cultural variables) between the height of a ruined building and the depth of the biomantle, which is the zone of bioturbation. To enable archaeologists to assess the appropriateness of settlement detection procedures, including surface survey, I propose a scheme that classifies architectural remains in terms of their protrusion, building height, and visibility characteristics. The scheme can be employed to determine if and why architectural remains are protrusive in particular study areas. To demonstrate its analytical utility, I apply the scheme and the model of building burial through bioturbation that underlies it to the problem of Maya invisible settlement. I conclude that in the Maya lowlands of Mesoamerica, building remains buried through bioturbation are a more abundant settlement category than many archaeologists have supposed.     

The Cave Who Never Was: Outsider Archaeology and Failed Collaboration in the USA

Abstract

The alleged 1982 discovery of a phantasmagorical Late-Antique necropolis in southern Illinois has largely escaped the attention of professional archaeologists, despite thousands of artefacts having been sold to naive collectors and would-be revolutionary scholars for more than a quarter of a century. The site (named Burrows Cave after its notorious finder) is a staple of outsider archaeology, like 10,000-year-old pyramids and ancient astronauts. Burrows Cave flourishes in the extra-disciplinary realm of hyperdiffusionist archaeology, terra incognita outside the bounds of the traditional science and thus not considered worthy of examination by scholars. This essay explores the significance of US archaeologists’ failure to critically yet respectfully engage with a public who is extremely interested in archaeological discoveries but sceptical of scholarly elitism. Professionals’ disinterest has resulted in a dismissal of outsider archaeology en masse, leaving the worst abuses unchecked. This leaves the public with few clues to distinguish the impossible from the improbable, unorthodox, or iconoclastic. Audacious enterprises such as Burrows’ are left to flourish, driving wedges between archaeologists and the interested public, preventing effective collaboration and dialogue. Burrows Cave is a lesson for aspiring archaeologists: proof of what happens when professionals turn up their noses at opportunities for engagement with community interests.     

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.     

The Cunning Means of Domination

This discussion started on the WAC listserv when I objected on 8 April 2007 to a short message sent by Claire Smith on the previous day. She had been announcing that her colleague “Heather Burke and [are] putting together a list of important non-Anglo archaeologists” and was asking whether “anyone has any recommendations” for that list and, if so, whether they would email her off list. I objected strongly. This paper explains why. In doing so I am describing the degree of complexity language use has acquired in the contemporary world with old linguistic maps quickly become obsolete. To insist that English is simply the lingua franca of academic discourse is to ignore that complexity. The wide use of English as an academic lingua franca means in practice that there are very strong asymmetries not only in individual archaeologists’ abilities to express themselves competently and confidently in that language but also in what is considered appropriate or possible to express. For a language is not simply a random code with which anything might be said to anybody. Language, and the conventions that govern how a given language is to be applied, influences to a large extent even what is a sensible thing to say in a given context. Language use in archaeology is not about translating the same archaeology into different languages but about translating between different archaeologies and associated cultural practices including languages. The only sensible way forward is for WAC to promote among its members the learning of more languages—which is something the vast majority of “non-Anglo” archaeologists already knows and accepts as a fact of life. We do not need lists of “non-Anglo” archaeologists that are considered worth reading about in English, but more archaeologists being able to appreciate the work of colleagues in its original language. In conclusion I urge exclusively Anglophone archaeologists to please stop finding excuses for learning foreign languages.     

Recent Landscape Archaeology in South America

South American archaeologists use the term landscape to analyze a broad range of relationships. Examples include intensive agriculture and political power, myth and place, and climate change and cultural development. Landscape archaeology is necessarily spatial analysis, but scholars work at different scales and use different methods. This essay highlights the influence of geography, anthropology, and new methodologies on four definitions of landscape: ecological habitat, built environment, a stage for performance, and integrating subsistence and settlement. In a number of cases, landscape archaeologists, stakeholders, and researchers from different traditions work at different scales to meaningfully share information, clarify their differences, and compare their analyses and conclusions.     

Archaeology,Ethno‐history and Oral Traditions: Approaches to the Indigenous Past

Indigenous groups across the world are actively looking to maintain or rediscover their past. Many historians and archaeologists are sympathetic to their quest. As a result different ways of narrating the past are in action: oral tradition, ethno‐history and archaeology.

In the following the potential of each approach is discussed. In particular the possibility for collaboration between indigenous approaches and academic disciplines is evaluated. The focus is on the interpretative narrative, rather than on cultural heritage management. It is argued that we need multivocality as well as collaboration and integration of narratives.     

Preliminary assessment of a wreck in the Red River, Choctaw County, Oklahoma, USA

This paper reports the initial recording of an early riverboat wreck located in the Red River between Oklahoma and Texas. The wreck is probably the Caddo lost in 1842. The visible wreckage is described and the history of the Caddo is discussed. This is the earliest western rivers steamboat investigated by archaeologists to date.