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.     

STATE PER CAPITA INCOME CONVERGENCE SINCE 1950: SHARECROPPING'S DEMISE AND OTHER INFLUENCES*

ABSTRACT. Prevailing theories wrongly attribute post-1950 convergence of state per capita incomes to (1) neoclassical adjustment mechanisms, (2) institutional sclerosis, and (3) southern industrialization. But convergence-essentially a weakening of southern poverty–resulted mainly from the South's overcoming its legacy of slavery: the sharecropper-tenant system, agricultural dependence, high black population percentages, poor education, and low wage rates. Sharecropping was the dominant feature; abject poverty among sharecroppers dragged southern income to its knees. Sharecropping's collapse and attendant South-to-North migration affected the legacy's other features in ways that raised income. Manufacturing growth and transport improvements caused relative income in the West to decline.     

The Relations Bwetween Geography and History Reconsidered

The ideas of Sauer, Darby, Clark, and Meinig have had a formative influence on the making of modern Anglo–American historical geography. These scholars emphasized the spatial– and place–;focused orientation of geography, contrasting it with history’s concern with time, the past, and change. Historical geography was conceived as combining the spatial interests of geography with the temporal interest of history, creating a field concerned with changing spatial patterns and landscapes. This idea of historical geography avoided issues in the philosophy of history by making the historical geographer a kind of spectator to external changes in the ways things were ordered and arranged on the face of the earth. This “natural history” view of historical geography failed to deal with history conceived as an autonomous mode of understanding in which the scholar’s task is to understand human activity as an embodiment of thought. Historical geography is more adequately conceived as a Collingwoodian–type historical discipline, in which the task of the historical geographer is aimed at rethinking and displaying the thought of historical agents as their actions relate to the physical environment. The traditional subject matter of historical geography is not thereby redefined, but a change in the way geography is seen in its relation to history is necessitated.