Is Archaeology Developmental?

Archéologie et développement semblent deux notions fort éloignées l'une de l'autre. La première évoque une recherche fondamentale, pure alors que la deuxième parle de santé, économie, éducation, agriculture, pêche, équipement, transports, communications, etc. . . Et pourtant elles se rejoignent dans le bien-être aussi bien matériel que culturel qu'elles sont supposées apporter aux peuples auxquels elles s'adressent. En effet, si elles introduisent, importent des connaissances, des savoirs des techniques et des machines permettant de mieux maîtriser le monde, nourrir et élever les peuples, ces connaissances interfèrent avec la façon dont ceux-ci vivent et ceci depuis longtemps, la façon dont ceux-ci pensent leurs vies et le monde: philosophies, religions, histoires et coutumes dont on pense se débarrasser en les considérant fausses ou irrationnelles. Ainsi apprend-on que laTerre est ronde et tourne autour du soleil, que nous sommes faits de particules, et qu'il faut s'incliner devant les lois de l'évolution. La Science nous a appris et nous apprend toujours la Vérité sur le monde qui nous entoure bien qu'elle ait donné les moyens intellectuels et matériels aux plus grands massacres que l'Histoire ait connus et bien qu'il ne se passe pas de mois sans catastrophes climatiques, industrielles, politiques ou culturelles ou sans sinistres prévisions, comme le nivellement du mondialisme! Ainsi un des problèmes centraux du développement, illustré ici par une réflexion historico-archéologique, réside dans le dialogue (ou son absence) entre ces deux domaines de connaissance: le scientifique, le moderne et l'autochtone, l'ethnique, le non-moderne. Si l'on veut que ce développement concerne la majorité de chaque peuple impliqué, il est de la plus haute importance de s'interroger sur les modalités des échanges et choix de savoirs, leur équilibre et les raisons profondes des désaccords planétaires à ce sujet. Sous cette condition, le Développement deviendra vraiment démocratique.Archaeology and development seem widely separated notions. The former evokes fundamental pure research whereas the latter talks about health, economics, education, agriculture, fishery, equipment, transports, communications, and so on. Nevertheless both focus on the well-being as well material as cultural which they are supposed to bring to people. In fact if they input and import knowledge, technologies and machineries allowing a better mastering of the world, together with feeding and educating people, both development and archaeology interfere with the ways in which people live and many of the things they believe: philosophies, religions, histories, and customs that become defined as false or irrational. Thus we are taught that the Earth is round and revolves around the sun, that we are made of particles, and that we have to bow in front of the laws of evolution. Science taught us Truth and still does, a truth that provided the intellectual and material means for the worst massacres of history. Thus one of the central problems of development, herein illustrated by a historico-archaeological reflection, lies in dialogue (or its absence) between these two knowledge domains: the scientific, modern and the autochtonous, ethnic, nonmodern. If development projects are to benefit all, it is of the utmost importance to wonder about the exchanges and choices of knowledge, their balance, and the deep meanings of globalization. Under such conditions, development will become really democratic.     

A laboratory cave for the study of wall degradation in rock art caves: an implementation in the Vézère area

The aim of this proposal is to present an original approach to the study and preservation of rock art caves. A multidisciplinary study of cave wall alteration will be performed to understand the impact of environmental context on the evolution of wall surfaces. The approach involves the choice of a cave with characteristics similar to painted caves in the studied area (Vézère Valley in Dordogne, France): e.g., cave wall alteration, lithology, morphology, etc. This selected cave is intended to become a laboratory cave, monitored for the acquisition of chemical, physical and biological environmental data on bedrock, air and fluids along with their characteristics. A cave without art or archaeological interest has been chosen specifically to conduct experiments, to make in situ analysis and to obtain samples. The results are to be completed by specific observations in several other caves and compiled in a database.     

Pleistocene frogs from the Darling Downs,southeastern Queensland,and their palaeoenvironmental significance

Systematic collecting from fluvial late Pleistocene deposits from the Darling Downs, southeast Queensland, Australia, has led to the recovery of the first fossil frogs from the region, ail from the Myobatrachidae, a family of ground dwelling and burrowing frogs. The most common species recovered, Limnodynastes tasmaniensis, is extant on the Darling Downs. The fossil taxa include species whose extant populations inhabit arid zones(Limnodynastes sp. cf. L. spenceri), montane forests (Kyarranus spp.), and open woodlands (Neobatrachus sudelli), and indicate the existence of a mosaic of habitats during the Pleistocene. The absence of the Hylidae (tree frogs), a family common throughout the Darling Downs today, may be explained by a taphonomic bias that favours non-arboreal forms. Alternatively, hylids may have been rare or absent on the Darling Downs during the Pleistocene.