archaeological practice
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

221
(FIVE YEARS 61)

H-INDEX

16
(FIVE YEARS 3)

Author(s):  
N.E. Berdnikova ◽  
G.A. Vorobieva ◽  
I.M. Berdnikov ◽  
A.A. Shchetnikov ◽  
I.A. Filinov ◽  
...  

The value of geoarchaeology in archaeological research is discussed with an example of Baikal Siberia. Geoarchaeology is considered as an interface between archaeology and Earth sciences comprising a specific set of approaches, methods, and procedures. Nowadays, geoarchaeology constitutes a full-fledged research branch within the world archaeological practice. However, there are some problems in the determination of the essence and the role of geoarchaeology in archaeological studies, especially in Russia. In particular, the question whether geoarchaeology represents an independent discipline or an interdisciplinary approach has not been resolved yet. Moreover, archaeologists often focus on increasing the number of analytical methods to the detriment of their conceptual basis. In the Russian archaeological practice, the uncertain role of geoarchaeology is manifested by its perception as an auxiliary discipline with limited capabilities for the archaeological interpretations. As a result of many years of research on archaeological sites of Baikal Siberia, we have developed our own concept of geoarchaeology as a source study with a transdisciplinary character. It is based on four principles. Firstly, in our opinion, geoarchaeology constitutes a source study discipline with its own research methods. Geoarchaeological assessment represents one of the most important verification methods aimed at the determination of the degree of correspondence between the results of archaeological and natural science data. Secondly, the main object of research is a geoarchaeological object, which is a composite integral system with a mixture of traces of natural and anthropogenic events encrypted in it. We define the layer with cultural remains, where the natural component predominates, as ‘culture-bearing’. The layer with the predominantly anthropogenic component can be called ‘cultural’. Thirdly, geoarchaeology should be a transdisciplinary branch, the nature of which is determined by the complex origins of the geoarchaeological site. Such an amalgamation allows overcoming disciplinary differences and contradictions which leads to the formation of new knowledge levels. At fourth, geoarchaeological research should be based principally on the methods of actualism and stratigraphy in conjunction with overcoming misidentification of objects and phenomena, as well as on the pedolithological and event-driven approaches.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Michał Pawleta

This article aims to conceptualize the present state of public archaeology in Poland, which has recently become topical in archaeological practice. The author defines public archaeology and discusses the historical background of such activities in the context of the specific traditions of Polish archaeology. He then describes the main forms of outreach activities undertaken by archaeologists in Poland and presents community-oriented initiatives that go beyond the education of the general public about the past and strive to engage local communities in activities focused on archaeology and archaeological heritage. He concludes by outlining some directions that this sub-discipline may adopt in future.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 250-256
Author(s):  
Jiafang Liang

OverviewSpatial and shape data represented by 3D digital models have become a central component of our archaeological datasets. Immersive visual and audio interaction with these models offers an intuitive way to use these data. The mixing of the virtual with the real world suits archaeological work particularly well, and the technologies of augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR) enable this type of interaction. Much past work on these technologies has involved public engagement, but they also hold the potential for valuable deployment directly in archaeological practice and research, especially the seamless integration offered by MR. This review examines the range of experiments archaeologists are currently undertaking with AR and MR, and it looks to the future applications of these technologies.


10.5334/bck.j ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 105-113
Author(s):  
L. Meghan Dennis

Though the ethics of archaeological practice have changed over the life of the discipline (and have arguably become more robust), full consideration has not yet been given to how digital methodologies and the emergence of digital technologies have created new areas requiring ethical introspection. The pace of adoption of digitally centred archaeological data and digitally facilitated archaeological practice has not been met by the adoption of discipline-wide standards related to archaeological ethics. The result of this mismatch in ethics and practice is the creation of archaeologists who utilize digital forms, but whose archaeology is ungrounded in frameworks that specifically consider the ethical burdens of digital tools, methodology, and theory. This chapter details views of digital archaeological ethics related to digital archaeology as tools, digital archaeology as methodology, and digital archaeological pedagogy.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Jacob Holland-Lulewicz ◽  
Brandon T. Ritchison

Abstract As the use of large-scale radiocarbon datasets becomes more common and applications of Bayesian chronological modeling become a standard aspect of archaeological practice, it is imperative that we grow a community of both effective users and consumers. Indeed, research proposals and publications now routinely employ Bayesian chronological modeling to estimate age ranges such as statistically informed starts, ends, and spans of archaeological phenomena. Although advances in interpretive techniques have been widely adopted, sampling strategies and determinations of appropriate sample sizes for radiocarbon data remain generally underdeveloped. As chronological models are only as robust as the information we feed into them, formal approaches to assessing the validity of model criteria and the appropriate number of radiocarbon dates deserve attention. In this article, through a series of commonly encountered scenarios, we present easy-to-follow instructions for running simulations that should be used to inform the design and construction of chronological models.


2021 ◽  
pp. 146960532110280
Author(s):  
Débora L Soares

This article proposes a multitemporal approach to the study of archaeological ceramics in the Peruvian North Coast through archaeological ethnography. It allows us to create a new perspective of a past that seems to be continuously brought back in the ritual practices of curanderos (shamans), and in the daily life of other subjects that interact with what archaeologists call archaeological artifacts. In the rituals of curanderos and in the practice of huaqueo, where archaeological ceramics are known as huacos, it is possible to see how these vessels come to life, performing within a complex meshwork of relationships which extend over different worlds, as well as human and other-than-human participation. This discussion provokes the reevaluation of the relationships among archaeological heritage, archaeological material, and archaeological practice itself. It also shows how past and present are related in this specific Andean context.


Heritage ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 979-984
Author(s):  
Chelsea Fisher ◽  
Arlen F. Chase

In her book Maya Cultural Heritage: How Archaeologists and Indigenous Communities Engage the Past (Roman and Littlefield 2016), Patricia McAnany urges archaeologists who work in the Maya region (i.e., southern Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, western El Salvador, and western Honduras) “to leave the quiet jungle path” (p. 6)—that is, the mindset where many archaeologists comfortably assert exclusive mastery of the past—“and engage with an archaeological practice that is more uncertain but more inclusive” [...]


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-192
Author(s):  
Marie Louise Stig Sørensen

The active and discursive nature of material culture is the subject of this paper. It will, however, be approached from the point of view of typology and in particular the debate about the 'Swedish Typology’ (Gräslund 1974). Typology is probably the archaeological method or theory through which the discipline has most explicitly stated its view on the nature of the archaeological object. Inspired by the idea of naturalised epistemology as the basis for understanding how knowledge is constructed within the sciences (as discussed by Thomas 1996: 194), it is here argued that what we do, as archaeologists, is of importance rather than the theorising about our actions. Through a discussion of typology as expressed in archaeological practice, this paper will propose that the relationship between the object and typology is much simpler and more complex than our habitual use of the concept tends to suggest. It is proposed that the creation of typologies reveals the quite decisive influence which the object has upon the archaeological constructions. Typologies, moreover, are intimately connected to prehistoric production strategies. It is the relationship between these two dimensions of typologies, that we must understand in order to fully realise their potentials and understand their roles in archaeological practice.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-122
Author(s):  
Kristian Kristiansen

In this article it is argued that "heritage" both as a theoretical concept and a practice, is central to defining archaeology's role in society. Greater critical attention should therefore be given to this arena of archaeological practice on the part of theoretical archaeology and the heritage administration itself. Since archaeological heritage management is situated between interests in the present, these have to be defined as a first step. Three basic concepts and their role in shaping the development of archaeological heritage management are briefly analysed: the cultural environment, the cultural biography and cultural identity. It is argued that they are part of a development towards a more holistic perception and ideological use of the cultural heritage. This invites political manipulation. To avoid this, certain universal objectives in combination with ethical guidelines are suggested.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document