Editorial

Abstract

A recent online article in The Daily Beast listed archaeology as one of the thirteen most useless undergraduate degrees. The article failed to identify transferable job skills gained while engaged in archaeological work. Further, archaeological field programmes and labs offer an alternative learning environment that benefits some students. This article reviews two archaeological projects that used archaeology as a form of social activism to provide employment and education to an under-served community as a fundamental aspect of its goals. The Hopedale Archaeology Project is an archaeology field project based in a north-east Canadian community that provides education and work opportunities for Inuit students. The Veterans Curation Program based in the United States provides temporary employment to recently discharged military veterans in an archaeological and archival curation lab. These programmes assist individuals to re-establish themselves within the workforce and add to their academic and professional growth, as well as incorporate a public outreach component that makes archaeology and history more accessible to the public.     

Embracing the Complexities of ‘Big Data’ in Archaeology: the Case of the English Landscape and Identities Project

This paper considers recent attempts within archaeology to create, integrate and interpret digital data on an unprecedented scale—a movement that resonates with the much wider so-called big data phenomenon. Using the example of our work with a particularly large and complex dataset collated for the purpose of the English Landscape and Identities project (EngLaID), Oxford, UK, and drawing on insights from social scientists’ studies of information infrastructures much more broadly, we make the following key points. Firstly, alongside scrutinising and homogenising digital records for research purposes, it is vital that we continue to appreciate the broader interpretative value of ‘characterful’ archaeological data (those that have histories and flaws of various kinds). Secondly, given the intricate and pliable nature of archaeological data and the substantial challenges faced by researchers seeking to create a cyber-infrastructure for archaeology, it is essential that we develop interim measures that allow us to explore the parameters and potentials of working with archaeological evidence on an unprecedented scale. We also consider some of the practical and ethical consequences of working in this vein.     

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.     

An Overview of Historical Archaeology in Queensland, Australia

The ability of historical archaeology to make a significant contribution to our understanding of Queensland’s recent past is hindered by factors including few practitioners, limited publications about historical archaeological research and a need to establish its relevance beyond the archaeological community. There exists great opportunities in Queensland for researchers to explore a diverse range of research topics of which only some are beginning to be investigated through historical archaeological enquiry. This paper investigates the current state of the discipline in Queensland, the challenges practitioners face today and into the future, and the avenues down which historical archaeologists may make significant contributions to our understanding of Queensland’s recent past.     

Sociopolitics in Southeastern Archaeology: The Role of Gender in Scholarly Authorship

We explore the relationship between gender, authorship, and editorship in conference presentations and publications as a lens to examine current disciplinary sociopolitics and the relative contributions of men and women to southeastern archaeological research. We also report on the results of a survey on publishing trends in southeastern archaeology that we circulated to the Southeastern Archaeological Conference (SEAC) membership in March 2014. The evaluation of publishing trends serves as a means to investigate academic merit and visibility, along with the production and validation of knowledge in southeastern archaeology. We document a strong gender imbalance in publication rates across a range of publication venues, including regional journals, state archaeology journals, and edited volumes, despite growing numbers of women presenting research at SEAC meetings. We discuss possible reasons for these gender disparities based on survey response data from members of the SEAC community. Despite a current culture and context of women's advancement in southeastern archaeology, many challenges and obstacles remain.     

Strategies for Teaching Maritime Archaeology in the Twenty First Century

Maritime archaeology is a multi-faceted discipline that requires both theoretical learning and practical skills training. In the past most universities have approached the teaching of maritime archaeology as a full-time on-campus activity designed for ‘traditional’ graduate students; primarily those in their early twenties who have recently come from full-time undergraduate study and who are able to study on-campus. The needs of mature-age and other students who work and live in different places (or countries) and therefore cannot attend lectures on a regular basis (or at all) have largely been ignored. This paper provides a case study in the teaching of maritime archaeology from Australia that, in addition to ‘traditional’ on-campus teaching, includes four main components: (1) learning field methods through field schools; (2) skills training through the AIMA/NAS avocational training program; (3) distance learning topics available through CD-ROM and using the Internet; and (4) practicums, internships and fellowships. The author argues that programs to teach maritime archaeology in the twenty first century need to be flexible and to address the diverse needs of students who do not fit the ‘traditional’ model. This involves collaborative partnerships with other universities as well as government underwater cultural heritage management agencies and museums, primarily through field schools, practicums and internships.     

The Need for a Multivocal Approach to Researching and Managing Guam's World War II Underwater Cultural Heritage

Since 2006, four maritime archaeology field schools, desktop and field surveys have been carried out in Guam. In 2012 a site associated with the United States Navy's Construction Battalion (US Seabees) was investigated. This paper summarizes the historical background of Guam and the known sites of maritime archaeological interest, particularly those dating to World War II. The problems of public interpretation of the cultural material of colonial powers are considered, and, using the Seabee site as an example, ways in which Guam's indigenous Chamorro people can be included in this history are presented.     

Pencils and Pixels: Drawing and Digital Media in Archaeological Field Recording

Within the context of a growing emphasis on digital recording, what is the place of analog drawing in archaeological fieldwork? In this article, we situate the increased application of digital drawing methods by providing several historical examples of archaeological field drawing in British archaeology to demonstrate the connection between understanding the archaeological record and illustration. Given this background of analog archaeological recording, we then explore the current state of archaeological field drawing and the affordances of digital illustration for recording and interpreting the archaeological record, review literature in architecture and design regarding the cognitive function of analog and digital drawing, and discuss the possible future implications of born-digital or paperless archaeology.     

Localizing the Different Faces of Archaeological Landscapes in South India

Siruthavoor is a village situated 40?km south of Chennai in south India. The people of this village share their landscape with archaeological remains of south India’s past, including Iron Age–Early Historic burials and medieval temples. As an archaeologist, having witnessed and been both an indirect and direct participant in the changing reactions, actions, and perceptions of the community towards these monuments, I use this paper to explore the implications we can draw from the interaction between archaeological landscapes and various actors, spanning a period of twelve years. In India, as in many other countries, archaeological landscapes, monuments, and objects face the possibility of alteration, conservation, preservation, or destruction. The factors involved in this, I argue, are specific to localized conscious and unconscious decision-making by people living around such archaeological sites. Delving deeper into these issues will help us understand these often seemingly inexplicable choices that imperil the continued presence of archaeological monuments in the contemporary landscape. The behind-the-scenes events that occur in the ‘field’ of archaeology often remain untold, and yet they hold a lot of information. Through this narrative, this paper explores some of the subjectivities that we need to acknowledge as academics.     

Sites,sacredness, and stories: Interactions of archaeology and contemporary paganism

Folklore has, until very recently, been at the fringes of archaeological research. Post-processual archaeology has promoted plurality in interpretation, however, and archaeology more widely is required to make itself relevant to contemporary society; so, contemporary folkloric practices vis-a`-vis archaeological remains are once again receiving attention. In this paper we examine contemporary Pagan understandings of and engagements with “sacred sites” in England. Specifically, we explore how Pagan meanings are inscribed and constituted, how they draw on “traditional” understandings of sites and landscapes, and instances in which they challenge or reify the “preservation ethic” of heritage management. From active interactions with sites, such as votive offerings and instances of fire and graffiti damage, to unconventional (contrasted with academic) interpretations of sites involving wights and spirit beings, Neolithic shamans, or goddesses, there are diverse areas of contest. We argue archaeology must not reject Pagan and other folklores as “fringe,” but, in an era of community archaeology, transparency and collaboration, respond to them, preferably dialogically.     

UNESCO, URI, and Archaeology in the Deep Blue Sea: Archaeological Ethics and Archaeological Oceanography

Multiple groups have interests that intersect within the field of deep submergence (beyond the 50 meter range of SCUBA) archaeology. These groups?? differing priorities present challenges for interdisciplinary collaboration, particularly as there are no established guidelines for best practices in such scenarios. Associating the term ??archaeology?? with projects directed at underwater cultural heritage that are guided by archaeologists poses a real risk to that heritage. Recognizing that the relevant professional organizations, local laws, and conventions currently have little ability to protect pieces of cultural heritage across disciplines and international boundaries, the authors propose institution-specific mechanisms, called Archaeology Review Boards, guided by local and international laws and conventions concerning cultural heritage, as the best means to provide oversight for academically centered archaeological activities at the local level.     

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.     

考古学的中国深度:张忠培先生的文化演进论

张忠培先生始终深入田野考古,坚持"让材料牵着鼻子走",在系统构建考古学文化谱系的基础上,提出了既符合中国具体实际又体现人类共同规律的文化演进论。张忠培先生在坚实而高水准的实践起点上,不断开拓学术生长点,构建起了宏大的学术体系,创造性地开展和领导了田野考古实践工作,为中国考古学奠定了坚实的基础,科学地发现和表述了蕴含着中国文化基因的谱系结构,展现出考古学的中国深度。     

Personal,Political, Pedagogic: Challenging the Binary Bind in Archaeological Teaching,Learning and Fieldwork

In this paper, we consider how we can undercut the various binaries of gender and sexuality in archaeological practice and particularly in our teaching. We argue that taking an assemblage theory approach enables us to look at the multiplicity of identities of those practicing archaeology as different and intersecting assemblages that bring one another into being through their connections at different scales. In particular, we examine how this approach can be applied to archaeological pedagogy and how this in turn enables us to move away from modern binary distinctions about sex and gender identities from the ‘bottom up’, fostering an approach in our students that will then go on to be developed in professional practice.     

Archaeological Ethnography,Heritage Management,and Community Archaeology: A Pragmatic Approach from Crete

This article examines the introduction of archaeological ethnography as an approach to establish positioned research and bring context-specific and reflexive considerations into community archaeology projects. It considers recent critiques of heritage management in archaeology and the role of archaeologists as experts in it, contending that smaller and less prominent sites exist in different contexts and pose different problems than large-scale projects usually addressed in the literature. We describe how the ‘Three Peak Sanctuaries of Central Crete’ project, investigating prehistoric Minoan ritual sites, involves communities and stakeholders and what demands the latter pose on experts in the field. Archaeological work is always already implicated in local development projects which create and reproduce power hierarchies. It is therefore important that archaeologists maintain their critical distance from official heritage discourses, as they are materialized in development programmes, while at the same time engaging with local expectations and power struggles; they also have to critically address and position their own assumptions. We use examples from our community archaeology project to propose that these goals can be reached through archaeological ethnographic fieldwork that should precede any archaeological project to inform its methodological decisions, engage stakeholders, and collaboratively shape heritage management strategies.     

Transdisciplinary Archaeology and the Future of Archaeological Practice: Citizen Science,Portable Science,Ethical Science

This paper presents a vision and a pathway for the future of archaeological practice, in which several fields that are currently considered distinct, including community-based collaborative archaeology, indigenous archaeology, and applied archaeology, could become the norm. Inspired by personal encounters with some exceptionally open and collaborative archaeology projects, as well as by recent advances in archaeological science, which are starting to make it more portable, this paper sets out an agenda for a more open approach to archaeological practice. It advocates a method of producing knowledge about the past that does not privilege one investigator over another, but gives everyone who is interested and wants to participate an opportunity to do. Specific methodological challenges that are discussed include the need to ‘flip’ the public outreach element of research designs, to embed open participation from the outset by nurturing relationships of mutual respect and trust, and to take advantage of, and improve, the portability of archaeological science, so that it can be done in and by local communities. It is argued here that the opening of archaeological research, including the archaeological sciences, to a wider range of participants, is the most ethical approach to archaeological practice in a pan-disciplinary research environment.     

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.     

Combining New Awareness and Public Support for Archaeology with In Situ Preservation of an Archaeological Monument

Preserving archaeological remains in situ is one of the main objectives of the Valletta Treaty, which was signed by the Dutch government in 1992. Subsequently, preservation in situ has become one of the pillars of archaeological heritage management in the Netherlands. Another objective of the Treaty is the promotion of heritage education and raising of public awareness for the protection and investigation of archaeological heritage. Until recently, this goal has received too little attention. The design and building of an underground visitor centre, DOMunder, raised an important question: How can we transform an archaeological monument into an asset for the community and at the same time ensure long-lasting preservation? Not many parallels exist, as most archaeological sites in urban environments are seen as a burden for development. Sites are generally either excavated or left in situ; in both cases the archaeology remains invisible and inaccessible to the public. In the case of DOMunder, the location in a wet sedimentary environment provided even more challenges. This paper focuses on a few of the many questions and problems that were raised before and during the building process and the (preliminary) answers and solutions.     

Maritime Archaeology and Climate Change: An Invitation

Maritime archaeology has a tremendous capacity to engage with climate change science. The field is uniquely positioned to support climate change research and the understanding of past human adaptations to climate change. Maritime archaeological data can inform on environmental shifts and submerged sites can serve as an important avenue for public outreach by mobilizing public interest and action towards understanding the impacts of climate change. Despite these opportunities, maritime archaeologists have not fully developed a role within climate change science and policy. Moreover, submerged site vulnerabilities stemming from climate change impacts are not yet well understood. This article discusses potential climate change threats to maritime archaeological resources, the challenges confronting cultural resource managers, and the contributions maritime archaeology can offer to climate change science. Maritime archaeology’s ability to both support and benefit from climate change science argues its relevant and valuable place in the global climate change dialogue, but also reveals the necessity for our heightened engagement.     

古代陶器的研究视野——有关中国考古学方法的几点思考

本文以史前陶器为例,拓展了陶器研究中的新视野：指出陶器并非只是生活用品或文化序列的标志物,它与自然环境、经济方式、社会组织、意识形态等方面均有着密切的关系。而要真正全面了解陶器所潜藏的各种古代文化信息,就必须首先寻找获取信息的新途径。就史前陶器而言,传统的地层学、类型学方法已不能满足考古学发展的新要求,而自然科学技术、考古统计学、民族考古学、实验考古学则是有效地获得材料的主要途径。从某种意义上说,考古方法体系的陈旧比考古理论的滞后更加不利于中国考古学的健康发展。