Archaeology
{{For|the magazine about archaeology|Archaeology (magazine)}}
Archaeology,
archeology, or
archæology (from
Greek:
αρχαιολογία - archaiologia, from
αρχαίος - archaios, "primal, ancient, old" and
λόγος - logos, "study") is the
science that studies
human cultures through the recovery, documentation, analysis and interpretation of material remains and environmental data, including
architecture,
artifacts, features,
biofacts, and
landscapes. Because archaeology's aim is to understand mankind, it is a humanistic endeavor.
(1)The goals of archaeology vary, and there is debate as to what its aims and responsibilities are. Some goals include the documentation and explanation of the origins and development of human
cultures, understanding
culture history, chronicling
cultural evolution, and studying human
behavior and
ecology, for both
prehistoric and
historic societies{{Fact|date=October 2007}}.
Archaeologists are also concerned with the study of methods used in the discipline, and the theoretical and philosophical underpinnings underlying the questions archaeologists ask of the past. The tasks of surveying areas in order to find new sites, excavating sites in order to recover cultural remains, classification, analysis, and preservation are all important phases of the archaeological process. These are all important sources of information. Given the broad scope of the discipline there is a great deal of cross-disciplinary research in archaeology. It draws upon
anthropology,
history,
art history,
classics,
ethnology,
geography,
(2) geology,
(3)(4)(5) physics,
information sciences,
chemistry,
statistics,
paleoecology,
paleontology,
paleozoology,
paleoethnobotany,
paleobotany .
Origins and definitions
In parts of
Europe and the
Old World, the discipline has its roots in
antiquarianism and the study of
Latin and
Ancient Greek, and so has a natural affinity with the field of
history.
Archaeology in ancient China developed from antiquarian pursuits as well, specifically from the
scholar-official's desires to revive the use of ancient relics in state ritual. This pursuit of his
Chinese peers was criticized by
Shen Kuo (1031–1095), who asserted that archaeology should be the pursuit of studying functionality, discovering the methods of manufacture from ancient times, and should be studied with an
interdisciplinary approach.
(6) Yet there were others who took the discipline as seriously as Shen; the official, historian, poet, and essayist
Ouyang Xiu (1007–1072) compiled an analytical catalogue of ancient rubbings on stone and bronze which pioneered ideas in early
epigraphy and archaeology.
(7)The study of
Egyptology began in medieval
Islamic Egypt, where
Muslim historians attempted to learn about
ancient Egyptian culture. The first known attempts at deciphering
Egyptian hieroglyphs were made by
Dhul-Nun al-Misri and
Ibn Wahshiyya in the 9th century, who were able to at least partly understand what was written in the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs, by relating them to the contemporary
Coptic language used by
Coptic priests in their time.
Abdul Latif al-Baghdadi, a teacher at
Cairo's
Al-Azhar University in the 13th century, wrote detailed descriptions on
ancient Egyptian monuments.
(8) Similarly, the 15th-century Egyptian historian
Al-Maqrizi wrote detailed accounts of Egyptian antiquities.In
North America archaeology is one of the four sub-fields, or
branches of anthropology. The other three branches are
cultural anthropology, the study of living cultures and societies;
linguistics, the study of language, including the origins of language and language groups; and
physical anthropology, includes the study of human evolution and physical and
genetic characteristics.
History of archaeology
missing image!
- Jade pot from the Qing Dynasty.jpg -
Gilt-metal and jade-inlaid pot. Qianlong reign in the Qing dynasty of China (c. 1700)
The history of archaeology has been one of increasing professionalisation, and the use of an increasing range of techniques, to obtain as much data on the site being examined as possible.Excavations of ancient monuments and the collection of antiquities have been taking place for thousands of years, but these were mostly for the extraction of valuable or aesthetically pleasing artifacts.
Johann Joachim Winckelmann is called "the prophet and founding hero of modern archaeology,".
(9) Winckelmann was one of the founders of modern scientific archaeology by first applying empirical categories of classical (Greek and Roman) style on a large, systematic basis to the
history of art and architecture.It was only in the 19th century that the systematic study of the past through its physical remains began to be carried out. A notable early development was the founding in Rome in 1829, by
Eduard Gerhard and others, of the Institute for Archaeological Correspondence (Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica or Institut für archäologische Korrespondenz). Archaeological methods were developed by both interested amateurs and professionals, including
Augustus Pitt Rivers and
William Flinders Petrie.This process was continued in the 20th century by such people as
Mortimer Wheeler, whose highly disciplined approach to excavation greatly improved the quality of evidence that could be obtained.During the 20th century, the development of
urban archaeology and then
rescue archaeology have been important factors, as has the development of
archaeological science, which has greatly increased the amount of data that it is possible to obtain.Another branch,
archaeoastronomy, is not as well known as archaeology, but deals with the study of ancient or traditional astronomies in cultural context.
Importance and applicability
Often archaeology provides the only means to learn of the existence and behaviors of people of the past. Across the millennia many thousands of cultures and societies and billions of people have come and gone of which there is little or no written record or existing records are misrepresentative or incomplete.
Writing as it is known today did not exist in human civilization until the
4th millennium BC, in a relatively small number of technologically advanced
civilizations. In contrast
Homo sapiens has existed for at least 200,000 years, and other species of
Homo for millions of years (see
Human evolution). These
civilizations are, not coincidentally, the best-known; they are open to the inquiry of historians for centuries, while the study of pre-historic cultures has arisen only recently. Even within a literate civilization many events and important human practices are not officially recorded. Any knowledge of the early years of human civilization – the development of
agriculture, cult practices of
folk religion, the rise of the first
cities – must come from archaeology.
(10)missing image!
- The'Ten Indus Scripts' discavered near the northen gateway of the citadel,Dholavira.JPG -
Ten Indus glyphs discovered near the northern gate of Dholavira (perhaps 5000 years old)
Even where written records do exist, they are often incomplete and invariably biased to some extent. In many societies, literacy was restricted to the
elite classes, such as the
clergy or the
bureaucracy of court or temple. The literacy even of
aristocrats has sometimes been restricted to deeds and contracts. The interests and world-view of elites are often quite different from the lives and interests of the populace. Writings that were produced by people more representative of the general population were unlikely to find their way into
libraries and be preserved there for posterity. Thus, written records tend to reflect the biases, assumptions, cultural values and possibly deceptions of a limited range of individuals, usually only a fraction of the larger population. Hence, written records cannot be trusted as a sole source. The material record is closer to a fair representation of society, though it is subject to its own inaccuracies, such as
sampling bias and
differential preservation.In addition to their scientific importance, archaeological remains sometimes have political or cultural significance to descendants of the people who produced them, monetary value to collectors, or simply strong
aesthetic appeal. Many people identify archaeology with the recovery of such aesthetic, religious, political, or economic treasures rather than with the reconstruction of past societies.This view is often espoused in works of popular fiction, such as
Raiders of the Lost Ark,
The Mummy, and
King Solomon's Mines. When such unrealistic subjects are treated more seriously, accusations of
pseudoscience are invariably levelled at their proponents (see Pseudoarchaeology, below). However, these endeavours, real and fictional, are not representative of modern archaeology.
Archaeological theories
There is no single theory of archaeology, and even definitions are disputed. Until the mid-20th century, there was a general consensus that archaeology was closely related to both
history and
anthropology.The first major phase in the history of archaeological theory in the
United States developed during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It is commonly referred to as
cultural, or culture, history. It is best known for its emphasis on
historical particularism.
(11)In the 1920s in the American Southwest cultural historical archaeology was intimately tied with the
direct historical approach.
(12)(13) They proposed a "New Archaeology", which would be more "scientific" and "anthropological", with
hypothesis testing and the
scientific method very important parts of what became known as
processual archaeology.
(14)(15)(16)(17) Christopher Tilley,
(18) Daniel Miller,
(19)(20) and
Ian Hodder.
(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26) It questioned processualism's appeals to scientific positivism and impartiality, and emphasised the importance of a more self-critical theoretical
reflexivity{{Fact|date=October 2007}}. This approach is termed
post-processual archaeology. However, this approach has been criticized by processualists as lacking scientific rigor. The validity of both processualism and post-processualism is still under debate.
Historical Processualism is an emerging paradigm that seeks to incorporate a focus on process and post-processual archaeology's emphasis of reflexivity and history.
(27)Archaeological theory now borrows from a wide range of influences, including
neo-Darwinian evolutionary thought,
phenomenology,
postmodernism,
agency theory,
cognitive science,
Functionalism,
gender-based and
Feminist archaeology, and
Systems theory.
Methods
Survey
missing image!
- Monte Albán archeological site, Oaxaca.jpg -
Monte Alban archaeological site
A modern archaeological project often begins with a
survey. Regional survey is the attempt to systematically locate previously unknown sites in a region. Site survey is the attempt to systematically locate features of interest, such as houses and
middens, within a site. Each of these two goals may be accomplished with largely the same methods.Survey was not widely practiced in the early days of archaeology. Cultural historians and prior researchers were usually content with discovering the locations of monumental sites from the local populace, and excavating only the plainly visible features there.
Gordon Willey pioneered the technique of regional settlement pattern survey in 1949 in the
Viru Valley of coastal
Peru,
(28)(29) and survey of all levels became prominent with the rise of processual archaeology some years later.
(30)Survey work has many benefits if performed as a preliminary exercise to, or even in place of, excavation. It requires relatively little time and expense, because it does not require processing large volumes of soil to search out artifacts. (Nevertheless, surveying a large region or site can be expensive, so archaeologists often employ
sampling methods.)
(31) As with other forms of non-destructive archaeology, survey avoids ethical issues (of particular concern to descendant peoples) associated with destroying a site through excavation. It is the only way to gather some forms of information, such as
settlement patterns and settlement structure. Survey data are commonly assembled into
maps, which may show surface features and/or artifact distribution.The simplest survey technique is surface survey. It involves combing an area, usually on foot but sometimes with the use of mechanized transport, to search for features or artifacts visible on the surface. Surface survey cannot detect sites or features that are completely buried under earth, or overgrown with vegetation. Surface survey may also include mini-excavation techniques such as
augers,
corers, and
shovel test pits.
missing image!
- Légirégészet solt.jpg -
Aerial archeological photography - Solt, Hungary
Aerial survey is conducted using
cameras attached to
airplanes,
balloons, or even
kites. A bird's-eye view is useful for quick mapping of large or complex sites. Aerial photographs are used to document the status of the archaeological dig. Aerial imaging can also detect many things not visible from the surface.
Plants growing above a buried man made structure, such as a stone wall, will develop more slowly, while those above other types of features (such as
middens) may develop more rapidly. Photographs of ripening
grain, which changes colour rapidly at maturation, have revealed buried structures with great precision. Aerial photographs taken at different times of day will help show the outlines of structures by changes in shadows. Aerial survey also employs
infrared, ground-penetrating
radar wavelengths, and
thermography.
Archaeological geophysics can be the most effective way to see beneath the ground.
Magnetometers detect minute deviations in the
Earth's magnetic field caused by
iron artifacts,
kilns, some types of
stone structures, and even ditches and middens. Devices that measure the
electrical resistivity of the soil are also widely used. Archaeological Features whose electrical resistivity contrasts with that of surrounding soils can be detected and mapped. Some archaeological features (such as those composed of stone or brick) have higher resistivity than typical soils , while others (such as organic deposits or unfired clay) tend to have lower resistivity.Although some archaeologists consider the use of
metal detectors to be tantamount to treasure hunting, others deem them an effective tool in archaeological surveying. Examples of formal archaeological use of metal detectors include musketball distribution analysis on
English Civil War battlefields, metal distribution analysis prior to excavation of a nineteenth century ship wreck, and service cable location during evaluation. Metal detectorists have also contributed to the
archaeological record where they have made detailed records of their results and refrained from raising artifacts from their archaeological context. In the UK, metal detectorists have been solicited for involvement in the
Portable Antiquities Scheme.Regional survey in
underwater archaeology uses geophysical or remote sensing devices such as marine magnetometer,
side-scan sonar, or sub-bottom sonar.
Excavation
missing image!
- Vill excavation.jpg -
Archaeological excavation which discovered prehistoric caves in Vill, Austria
missing image!
- Sifting for POW remains, Wake Island.jpg -
An archaeologist sifting for POW remains on Wake Island.
Archaeological excavation existed even when the field was still the domain of amateurs, and it remains the source of the majority of data recovered in most field projects. It can reveal several types of information usually not accessible to survey, such as
stratigraphy, three-dimensional structure, and verifiably primary context.Modern excavation techniques require that the precise locations of objects and features, known as their
provenance or provenience, be recorded. This always involves determining their horizontal locations, and sometimes vertical position as well (also see
Primary Laws of Archaeology). Similarly, their
association, or
relationship with nearby objects and
features, needs to be recorded for later analysis. This allows the archaeologist to deduce what
artifacts and features were likely used together and which may be from different
phases of activity. For example, excavation of a site reveals its
stratigraphy; if a site was occupied by a succession of distinct
cultures, artifacts from more recent cultures will lie above those from more ancient cultures.Excavation is the most expensive phase of archaeological research,in relative terms. Also, as a destructive process, it carries
ethical concerns. As a result, very few sites are excavated in their entirety. Again the percentage of a site excavated depends greatly on the country and "method statement" issued. In places 90% excavation is common.
Sampling is even more important in excavation than in survey. It is common for large mechanical equipment, such as
backhoes (
JCBs), to be used in excavation, especially to remove the
topsoil (
overburden), though this method is increasingly used with great caution. Following this rather dramatic step, the exposed area is usually hand-cleaned with
trowels or
hoes to ensure that all features are apparent.The next task is to form a
site plan and then use it to help decide the method of excavation. Features dug into the
natural subsoil are normally excavated in portions in order to produce a visible
archaeological section for recording. A feature, for example a pit or a ditch, consists of two parts: the
cut and the
fill. The cut describes the edge of the feature, where the feature meets the natural soil. It is the feature's boundary. The fill is, understandably, what the feature is filled with, and will often appear quite distinct from the natural soil. The cut and fill are given consecutive numbers for recording purposes. Scaled plans and
sections of individual features are all drawn on site, black and white and colour photographs of them are taken, and
recording sheets are filled in describing the
context of each. All this information serves as a permanent record of the now-destroyed archaeology and is used in describing and interpreting the site.
Analysis
Once artifacts and structures have been excavated, or collected from surface surveys, it is necessary to properly study them, to gain as much data as possible. This process is known as post-excavation analysis, and is normally the most time-consuming part of the archaeological investigation. It is not uncommon for the final excavation reports on major sites to take years to be published.At its most basic, the artifacts found are cleaned, catalogued and compared to published collections, in order to classify them
typologically and to identify other sites with similar artifact assemblages. However, a much more comprehensive range of analytical techniques are available through
archaeological science, meaning that artifacts can be dated and their compositions examined. The bones, plants and pollen collected from a site can all be analyzed (using the techniques of
zooarchaeology,
paleoethnobotany, and
palynology), while any texts can usually be
deciphered.These techniques frequently provide information that would not otherwise be known and therefore contribute greatly to the understanding of a site.
Academic sub-disciplines
As with most
academic disciplines, there are a very large number of
archaeological sub-disciplines characterised by a specific method or type of material (e.g.
lithic analysis,
music,
archaeobotany), geographical or chronological focus (e.g.
Near Eastern archaeology,
Medieval archaeology), other thematic concern (e.g.
maritime archaeology,
landscape archaeology,
battlefield archaeology), or a specific
archaeological culture or
civilisation (e.g.
Egyptology,
Indology,
Sinology).
Historical archaeology
Historical archaeology is the study of cultures with some form of writing.In
England, archaeologists have uncovered the long-lost layouts of medieval villages abandoned after the crises of the 14th century and the equally lost layouts of 17th century parterre gardens swept away by a change in fashion.{{Fact|date=October 2007}} In downtown
New York City archaeologists have exhumed the 18th century remains of the African burial ground.{{Fact|date=October 2007}}
Ethnoarchaeology
Ethnoarchaeology is the archaeological study of living people.
(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37) The approach gained notoriety during the emphasis on middle range theory that was a feature of the processual movement of the 1960s.Early ethnoarchaeological research focused on hunting and gathering or foraging societies. Ethnoarchaeology continues to be a vibrant component of post-processual and other current archaeological approaches.
(38)(39)(40)(41)Experimental archaeology
Experimental archaeology represents the application of the experimental method to develop more highly controlled observations of processes that create and impact the archaeological record.
(42)(43)(44)(45)(46) In the context of the context of the logical positivism of processualism with its goals of improving the scientific rigor of archaeological
epistemologies the experimental method gained importance. Experimental techniques remain a crucial component to improving the inferential frameworks for interpreting the archaeological record.
Archaeometry
Archaeometry is a field of study that aims to systematize archaeological measurement. It emphasizes the application of analytical techniques from physics, chemistry, and engineering. It is a lively field of research that frequently focuses on the definition of the chemical composition of archaeological remains for source analysis.
(47)Cultural resources management
{{Original research|section|date=September 2007}}While archaeology can be done as a pure science, it can also be an applied science, namely the study of archaeological sites that are threatened by development. In such cases, archaeology is a subsidiary activity within
Cultural resources management (CRM), also called heritage management in the United Kingdom.
(48) Today, CRM accounts for most of the archaeological research done in the
United States and much of that in
western Europe as well. In the US, CRM archaeology has been a growing concern since the passage of the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, and most taxpayers, scholars, and politicians believe that CRM has helped preserve much of that nation's history and prehistory that would have otherwise been lost in the expansion of cities, dams, and highways. Along with other statutes, the NHPA mandates that projects on federal land or involving federal funds or permits consider the effects of the project on each
archaeological site.The application of CRM in the United Kingdom is not limited to government-funded projects. Since 1990
PPG 16(49) has required planners to consider archaeology as a
material consideration in determining applications for new development. As a result, numerous archaeological organisations undertake
mitigation work in advance of (or during) construction work in archaeologically sensitive areas, at the
developer's expense.In
England, ultimate responsibility of care for the historic environment rests with the
Department for Culture, Media and Sport(50) in association with
English Heritage(51). In
Scotland,
Wales and
Northern Ireland, the same responsibilities lie with
Historic Scotland(52),
Cadw(53) and the
Environment and Heritage Service (Northern Ireland)(54) respectively.Among the goals of CRM are the identification, preservation, and maintenance of
cultural sites on public and private lands, and the removal of culturally valuable materials from areas where they would otherwise be destroyed by human activity, such as proposed construction. This study involves at least a cursory examination to determine whether or not any significant archaeological sites are present in the area affected by the proposed construction. If these do exist, time and money must be allotted for their
excavation. If initial survey and/or test excavation indicates the presence of an extraordinarily valuable site, the construction may be prohibited entirely. CRM is a thriving entity, especially in the United States and Europe where archaeologists from private companies and all levels of government engage in the practice of their discipline.Cultural resources management has, however, been criticized. CRM is conducted by private companies that bid for projects by submitting proposals outlining the work to be done and an expected budget. It is not unheard-of for the agency responsible for the construction to simply choose the proposal that asks for the least funding. CRM archaeologists face considerable time pressure, often being forced to complete their work in a fraction of the time that might be allotted for a purely scholarly endeavour. Compounding the time pressure is the vetting process of site reports which are required (in the US) to be submitted by CRM firms to the appropriate
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). From the SHPO's perspective there is to be no difference between a report submitted by a CRM firm operating under a deadline, and a multi-year academic project. The end result is that for a Cultural Resource Management archaeologist to be successful, they must be able to produce academic quality documents at a corporate world pace.The annual ratio of open academic archaeology positions (inclusive of
Post-Doc, temporary, and non tenure track appointments) to the annual number of archaeology MA/MSc and PhD students is grossly disproportionate. This dearth of academic positions causes a predictable excess of well educated individuals who join the ranks of the following year's crop of non-academically employed archaeologists. Cultural Resource Management, once considered an intellectual backwater for individuals with "strong backs and weak minds"
(55) has reaped the benefit of this massive pool of well educated professionals. This results in CRM offices increasingly staffed by advance degreed individuals with a track record of producing scholarly articles but who have the notches on their trowels to show they have been in the trenches as a
shovelbum.
Popular views of archaeology
Early archaeology was largely an attempt to uncover spectacular artifacts and features, or to explore vast and mysterious abandoned cities. Such pursuits continue to fascinate the public. Books, films, and video games, such as
King Solomon's Mines,
Indiana Jones,
Tomb Raider,
The Mummy and
Relic Hunter all testify to the public's interest in the discovery aspect of archaeology.Much thorough and productive research has indeed been conducted in dramatic locales such as
Copán and the
Valley of the Kings, but the bulk of activities and finds of modern archaeology are not so sensational. Archaeological adventure stories tend to ignore the painstaking work involved in carrying out modern
survey,
excavation, and
data processing. Some archaeologists refer to such portrayals as "
pseudoarchaeology".Archaeology has been portrayed in the mainstream media in sensational ways. This has its advantages and disadvantages. Many practitioners point to the childhood excitement of
Indiana Jones films and
Tomb Raider video games as the inspiration for them to enter the field{{Fact|date=October 2007}}. Archaeologists are also very much reliant on public support, the question of exactly who they are doing their work for is often discussed
(56). Without a strong public interest in the subject, often sparked by significant finds and celebrity archaeologists, it would be a great deal harder for archaeologists to gain the political and financial support they require.
Public Archaeology
Motivated by a desire to halt
looting, curb
pseudoarchaeology, and to help preserve archaeological sites through education and fostering public appreciation for the importance of archaeological heritage, archaeologists are mounting
public-outreach campaigns.
(57) They seek to stop looting by combatting people who illegally take artifacts from protected sites, and by alerting people who live near archaeological sites of the threat of looting. Common methods of public outreach include press releases, and the encouragement of school field trips to sites under excavation by professional archaeologists{{Fact|date=October 2007}}. Public appreciation of the significance of archaeology and archaeological sites often leads to improved protection from encroaching development or other threats.One audience for archaeologists' work is the public. They increasingly realize that their work can benefit non-academic and non-archaeological audiences, and that they have a responsibility educate and inform the public about archaeology. Local heritage awareness is aimed at increasing civic and individual pride through projects such as community excavation projects, and better public presentations of archaeological sites and knowledge{{Fact|date=October 2007}}.In the UK, popular archaeology programs such as
Time Team and
Meet the Ancestors have resulted in a huge upsurge in public interest{{Fact|date=October 2007}}. Where possible, archaeologists now make more provisions for public involvement and outreach in larger projects than they once did, and many local archaeological organizations operate within the
Community archaeology framework to expand public involvement in smaller-scale, more local projects. Archaeological excavation, however, is best undertaken by well-trained staff that can work quickly and accurately. Often this requires observing the necessary
health and safety and indemnity insurance issues involved in working on a modern
building site with tight deadlines. Certain charities and
local government bodies sometimes offer places on research projects either as part of academic work or as a defined community project{{Fact|date=October 2007}}. There is also a flourishing industry selling places on commercial
training excavations and archaeological holiday tours{{Fact|date=October 2007}}.Archaeologists prize local knowledge and often liaise with local historical and archaeological societies, which is one reason why
Community archaeology projects are starting to become more common. Often archaeologists are assisted by the public in the locating of archaeological sites, which professional archaeologists have neither the funding, nor the time to do. Anyone looking to participate in archaeological opportunities should contact one of these local societies or organizations.
Pseudoarchaeology
Pseudoarchaeology is an umbrella term for all activities that claim to be archaeological but in fact violate commonly accepted archaeological practices. It includes much fictional archaeological work (discussed above), as well as some actual activity. Many non-fiction authors have ignored the scientific methods of
processual archaeology, or the specific critiques of it contained in
post-processualism.An example of this type is the writing of
Erich von Däniken. His
Chariots of the Gods (1968), together with many subsequent lesser-known works, expounds a theory of ancient contacts between human civilisation on Earth and more technologically advanced extraterrestrial civilisations. This theory, known as
palaeocontact theory, or
Ancient astronaut theory, is not exclusively Däniken's, nor did the idea originate with him. Works of this nature are usually marked by the renunciation of well-established theories on the basis of limited evidence and the interpretation of evidence with a preconceived theory in mind.
Xenoarchaeology is the hypothetical future examination of the archaeology of extraterrestrials. It is theoretical and based in
science fiction work, and is not a recognised sub-discipline of archaeology.
Cryptoarchaeology claims to be a valid form of archaeology, in that it may follow commonly accepted best practices and the
scientific method of
processual archaeology, though it focuses on anomalous discoveries and other such remains that do not adhere to orthodox theory and thought.
Looting
missing image!
- Looting rontoy2007.jpg -
right|A looter's pit on the morning following its excavation, taken at Rontoy, Huaura Valley, Peru in June 2007. Several small holes left by looters' prospecting probes can be seen, as well as their footprints.
missing image!
- Adad-Nirari stela.jpg -
Stela of a king named Adad-Nirari. Object stolen from the Iraq National Museum in the looting in connection with the Iraq war of 2003.
Looting of archaeological sites by people in search of
hoards of buried treasure is an ancient problem. For instance, many of the tombs of the Egyptian
pharaohs were looted in antiquity{{Fact|date=October 2007}}.Archaeology stimulates interest in ancient objects, but it can also attract unwelcome attention by looters to these places{{Fact|date=October 2007}}. The commercial demand for artifacts encourages looting and the
illicit antiquities trade, which smuggles items abroad to private collectors. Looters damage or destroy archaeological sites, deny archaeologists valuable information that would be recovered from excavation, and ultimately rob people of the opportunity to know their past.
(58)Popular consciousness often associates looting with poor
Third World countries{{Fact|date=October 2007}}, but this is a false assumption.
(59) The first conviction of the transport of artifacts illegally removed from private property under the
Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA; Public Law 96-95; 93 Statute 721; 16 U.S.C. 470aamm) was in 1992 in the State of Indiana.
(60)Descendant peoples
In the United States, examples such as the case of
Kennewick Man have illustrated the tensions between
Native Americans and archaeologists which can be summarized as a conflict between a need to remain respectful towards burials sacred sites and the academic benefit from studying them. For years, American archaeologists dug on Indian burial grounds and other places considered sacred, removing artifacts and human remains to storage facilities for further study. In some cases human remains were not even thoroughly studied but instead archived rather than reburied. Furthermore, Western archaeologists' views of the past often differ from those of tribal peoples. The West views time as linear; for many natives, it is cyclic. From a Western perspective, the past is long-gone; from a native perspective, disturbing the past can have dire consequences in the present.As a consequence of this, American Indians attempted to prevent archaeological excavation of sites inhabited by their ancestors, while American archaeologists believed that the advancement of scientific knowledge was a valid reason to continue their studies. This contradictory situation was addressed by the
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA, 1990), which sought to reach a compromise by limiting the right of research institutions to possess human remains. Due in part to the spirit of postprocessualism, some archaeologists have begun to actively enlist the assistance of
indigenous peoples likely to be descended from those under study.Archaeologists have also been obliged to re-examine what constitutes an archaeological site in view of what native peoples believe to constitute sacred space. To many native peoples, natural features such as lakes, mountains or even individual trees have cultural significance. Australian archaeologists especially have explored this issue and attempted to survey these sites in order to give them some protection from being developed. Such work requires close links and trust between archaeologists and the people they are trying to help and at the same time study.While this cooperation presents a new set of challenges and hurdles to fieldwork, it has benefits for all parties involved. Tribal elders cooperating with archaeologists can prevent the excavation of areas of sites that they consider sacred, while the archaeologists gain the elders' aid in interpreting their finds. There have also been active efforts to recruit aboriginal peoples directly into the archaeological profession.
Repatriation
A new trend in the heated controversy between
First Nations groups and scientists is the
repatriation of native
artifacts to the original descendants. An example of this occurred
June 21,
2005, when community members and elders from a number of the 10
Algonquian nations in the
Ottawa area convened on the Kitigan Zibi reservation near
Maniwaki, Quebec, to inter ancestral human remains and burial goods — some dating back 6,000 years.The ceremony marked the end of a journey spanning thousands of years and many miles. The remains and artifacts, including
beads,
tools and
weapons, were originally excavated from various sites in the
Ottawa Valley, including
Morrison and the
Allumette Islands. They had been part of the
Canadian Museum of Civilization’s research collection for decades, some since the late 1800s. Elders from various Algonquin communities conferred on an appropriate reburial, eventually deciding on traditional
redcedar and
birchbark boxes lined with redcedar chips,
muskrat and
beaver pelts.Now, an inconspicuous rock mound marks the reburial site where close to 90 boxes of various sizes are buried. Although negotiations were at times tense between the Kitigan Zibi community and museum, they were able to reach agreement.
(61)Kennewick Man is another repatriation candidate that has been the source of heated debate.
See also
Lists
Related topics
Notes
-
[Renfrew and Bahn (1991)]
-
[Aldenderfer and Maschner (1996)]
-
[Gladfelter (1977)]
-
[Watters (1992)]
-
[Watters (2000)]
-
[Fraser & Haber, 227 (1986).]
-
[Ebrey, 148 (1999).]
-
[Dr. Okasha El Daly (2005), Egyptology: The Missing Millennium: Ancient Egypt in Medieval Arabic Writings, UCL Press, ISBN 1844720632. (cf. Arabic Study of Ancient Egypt, Foundation for Science Technology and Civilisation.)]
-
[Daniel J. Boorstin, The Discoverers, p. 584, Random House (New York, 1983)]
-
[Kevin Greene - Archaeology: an Introduction]
-
[Trigger (1989)]
-
This approach continues to be pursued in the American Southwest, the American Northwest Coast, Mesoamerica, the Andes, Oceania, Siberia, and other world areas where there appears to be continuity between living, indigenous populations and archaeological remains of past groups. In pursuing the direct historical approach, ethnohistorical and early historical records play an important role in articulating the connections between modern people and the archaeological past. Literary sources can be used in other contexts as well, for example, in the case of Hadrian's Wall.In the 1960s, a number of primarily American archaeologists, such as Lewis Binford and Kent Flannery, rebelled against the paradigms of cultural history.[Binford (1962)]
-
[Flannery (1967)]
-
In the 1980s, a new postmodern movement arose led by the British archaeologists Michael Shanks,[Shanks and Tilley (1987)]
-
[Shanks and Tilley (1988)]
-
[Shanks (1991)]
-
[Shanks (1993)]
-
[Tilley (1993)]
-
[Miller and Tilley1984]
-
[Miller et al. (1989)]
-
[Hodder (1982)]
-
[Hodder (1985)]
-
[Hodder (1987)]
-
[Hodder (1990)]
-
[Hodder (1991)]
-
[Hodder (1992)]
-
[Pauketat (2001)]
-
[Willey (1953)]
-
[Willey (1968)]
-
[Billman and Feinman (1999)]
-
[Redman (1974)]
-
[Gould (1971a)]
-
[Gould (1971b)]
-
[Yellen (1972)]
-
[Yellen (1977)]
-
[Gould and Yellen 1987]
-
[Yellen (1991)]
-
[Sillet et al. (2006)]
-
[Schott and Sillitoe (2005)]
-
[Ogundele (2005)]
-
[Kuznar (2001)]
-
[Ascher (1961)]
-
[Saraydar and Shimada (1971)]
-
[Saraydar and Shimada (1973)]
-
[Gifford-Gonzalez (1985)]
-
[Frison (1989)]
-
[Glascock et al. 1994]
-
[The University of Exeter - SoGAER - Department of Archaeology]
-
[Planning Policy Guidance 16: Archaeology and planning - Planning, building and the environment - Communities and Local Government]
-
[Department for Culture Media and Sport - historic environment]
-
[English Heritage - Stonehenge & the History of England : English Heritage]
-
[Historic Scotland]
-
[Cadw]
-
[Built Environment]
-
[Flannery (1982)]
-
[Denning 2004, Internet Archaeology 15weblink]
-
[Anthropological Studies Center (ASC)]
-
[Sheets (1973)]
-
A lack of financial resources and political will are chronic worldwide problems inhibiting more effective protection of archaeological sites.In 1937 W. F. Hodge the Director of the Southwest Museum in Los Angeles CA, released a statement that the museum would no longer purchase or accept collections from looted contexts.[Hodge (1937)]
-
[Munson et al. (1995)]
-
[WEB,weblink Canadian Geographic Online, ]
References
| author=Ascher, R.
| year=1961
| title=Experimental Archeology
| periodical=American Anthropologist
| volume=63
| issue=
| pages=793–816
}}
| author=Billman, B. R. & Feinman, G.
| year=1999
| title=Settlement Pattern Studies in the Americas—Fifty Years Since Virú
| place=Washington DC
| publisher=Smithsonian Institution Press
}}
| author=Binford, L.
| year=1962
| title=Archaeology as Anthropology
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=28
| issue=
| pages=217–225
}}
| author=Denning, K.
| year=2004
| title=The Storm of Progress' and Archaeology for an Online Public | periodical=Internet Archaeology | volume=15
| issue=
| pages=
}}
| author=Ebrey, Patricia Buckley
| year=1999
| title=The Cambridge Illustrated History of China
| place=Cambridge
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
{edih}
| author=Flannery, K. V.
| year=1967
| title=Culture History v. Culture Process: A Debate in American archaeology
| periodical=Scientific American
| volume=217
| issue=
| pages=119–122
}}
| author=Flannery, K. V.
| year=1982
| title=The Golden Marshalltown: A Parable for the Archaeology of the 1980s
| periodical=American Anthropologist
| volume=84
| issue=
| pages=265–278
}}
| author=Fraser, Julius Thomas and Francis C. Haber.
| year=1986
| title=Time, Science, and Society in China and the West
| place=Amherst
| publisher=University of Massachusetts Press
}}
| author=Frison, G. C.
| year=1989
| title=Experimental Use of Clovis Weaponry and Tools on African Elephants
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=54
| issue=
| pages=766–784
}}
| author=Glascock, M. D., Neff, H., Stryker, K. S. & Johnson, T. N.
| year=1994
| title=Sourcing Archaeological Obsidian by an Abbreviated NAA Procedure
| periodical=Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry
| volume=180
| issue=
| pages=29–35
}}
| author=Gifford-Gonzalez, D. P., Damrosch, D. B., Damrosch, D. R., Pryor, J. & Thunen, R. L.
| year=1985
| title=The Third Dimension in Site Structure: An Experiment in Trampling and Vertical Dispersal
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=50
| issue=
| pages=803–818
}}
| author=Gould, R.
| year=1971a
| title=The Archaeologist as Ethnographer: A Case from the Western Desert of Australia
| periodical=World Archaeology
| volume=3
| issue=
| pages=143–177
}}
| author=Gould, R., Koster, D. A. & Sontz, A. H. L.
| year=1971b
| title=The Lithic Assemblage of the Western Desert Aborigines of Australia
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=36
| issue=
| pages=149–169
}}
| author=Gould, R. & Yellen, J.
| year=1987
| title=Man the Hunted: Determinants of Household Spacing in Desert and Tropical Foraging Societies
| periodical=Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
| volume=6
| issue=
}}
| author=Hodder, I.
| year=1982
| title=Symbols in Action
| place=Cambridge
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
}}
| author=Hodder, I.
| year=1985
| chapter=Post-Processual Archaeology
| editor=SCHIFFER, M. B.
| title=Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory
| place=New York
| publisher=Academic Press
}}
| editor=Hodder, I.
| year=1987
| title=The Archaeology of Contextual Meaning
| place=New York
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
}}
| author=Hodder, I.
| year=1990
| chapter=Style as Historical Quality
| editor=HASTORF, M. C. A. C.
| title=The Uses of Style in Archaeology
| place=Cambridge
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
}}
| author=Hodder, I.
| year=1991
| title=Interpretive Archaeology and Its Role
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=56
| issue=
| pages=7–18
}}
| author=Hodder, I.
| year=1992
| title=Theory and Practice in Archaeology
| place=London
| publisher=Routeldge
}}
| author=Munson, C. A., Jones, M. M. & Fry, R. E.
| year=1995
| title=The GE Mound: An ARPA Case Study
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=60
| issue=
| pages=131–159
}}
| editor=Kuznar, L
| year=2001
| title=Ethnoarchaeology of Andean South America
| place=Ann Arbor
| publisher=International Monographs in Prehistory
{edih}
| author=Miller, D. & Tilley, C.
| year=1984
| chapter=Ideology, Power and Prehistory: An Introduction
| editor=MILLER, D. & TILLEY , C.
| title=Ideology, Power, and Prehistory
| place=Cambridge
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
}}
| editor=Miller, D., Rowlands, M., Tilley, C.
| year=1989
| title=Dominion and Resistance
| place=New York
| publisher=Routledge
}}
| author=Munson, C. A., Jones, M. M. & Fry, R. E.
| year=1995
| title=The GE Mound: An ARPA Case Study
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=60
| issue=
| pages=131–159
}}
| author=Ogundele, S. O.
| year=2005
| title=Ethnoarchaeology of Domestic Space and Spatial Behaviour Among the Tiv and Ungwai of Central Nigeria
| periodical=African Archaeological Review
| volume=22
| issue=
| pages=25–54
}}
| author=Pauketat, T. R.
| year=2001
| title=Practice and History in Archaeology: An Emerging Paradigm
| periodical=Anthropological Theory
| volume=1
| issue=
| pages=73–98
}}
| author=Redman, C. L.
| year=1974
| title=Archaeological Sampling Strategies
| place=Binghamton
| publisher=State University of New York at Binghamton
}}
| author=Renfrew, C. & Bahn, P. G.
| year=1991
| title=Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice
| place=London
| publisher=Thames and Hudson Ltd
}}
| author=Saraydar, S. & Shimada, I.
| year=1971
| title=A Quantitative Comparison of Efficiency Between A Stone Axe and A Steel Axe
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=36
| issue=
| pages=216–217
}}
| author=Saraydar, S. C. & Shimada, I.
| year=1973
| title=Experimental Archaeology: A New Outlook
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=38
| issue=
| pages=344–350
}}
| author=Sellet, F., Greaves, R. & Yu, P.-L.
| year=2006
| title=Archaeology and Ethnoarchaeology of Mobility
| place=Gainesville
| publisher=University Press of Florida
}}
| author=Shanks, M. & Tilley, C.
| year=1987
| title=Reconstructing Archaeology
| place=New York
| publisher=Cambridge university Press
}}
| author=Shanks, M. & Tilley, C.
| year=1988
| title=Social Theory and Archaeology
| place=Albuquerque
| publisher=University of New Mexico Press
}}
| author=Shanks, M.
| year=1991
| title=Some recent approaches to style and social reconstruction in classical archaeology
| periodical=Archaeological Review from Cambridge
| volume=10
| issue=
| pages=164–174
}}
| author=Shanks, M.
| year=1993
| title=Style and the design of a perfume jar from an Archaic Greek city state
| periodical=Journal of European Archaeology
| volume=1
| issue=
| pages=77–106
}}
| author=Sheets, P. D.
| year=1973
| title=The Pillage of Prehistory
| periodical=American Antiquity
| volume=38
| issue=
| pages=317–320
}}
| author=Shott, M. J. & Sillitoe, P.
| year=2005
| title=Use life and curation in New Guinea experimental used flakes
| periodical=Journal of Archaeological Science
| volume=32
| issue=
| pages=653–663
}}
| author=Taylor, W. W.
| year=1948
| title=A Study of Archaeology
| place=Menasha
| publisher=American Anthropological Association
}}
| editor=Tilley, C.
| year=1993
| title=Interpretive Archaeology
| place=Oxford
| publisher=Berg
}}
| author=Trigger, B. G.
| year=1989
| title=A History of Archaeological Thought
| place=Cambridge
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
}}
| author=Willey, G. R.
| year=1953
| title=Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Virú Valley, Perú
| place=Washington DC
}}
| author=Willey, G.
| year=1968
| title=Settlement Archaeology
| place=Palo Alto
| publisher=National Press
}}
| author=Yellen, J. & Harpending, H.
| year=1972
| title=Hunter-Gatherer Populations and Archaeological Inference
| periodical=World Archaeology
| volume=4
| issue=
| pages=244–253
}}
| author=Yellen, J.
| year=1977
| title=Archaeological Approaches to the Present
| place=New York
| publisher=Academic Press
}}
Further reading
External links
{{Commons cat|Archaeology}}
Argeologieሥነ ቅርስعلم الآثارArxeologiyaপ্রত্নতত্ত্ব(be-x-old:Археалёгія)
ArheologijaArqueologiaArcheologieArchiulugiaArchaeolegArkæologiArchäologieArheoloogiaΑρχαιολογίαArqueologíaArkeologioArkeologiaباستانشناسیArchéologieArgeologySeandálaíochtÀrsaidheachdArqueoloxía고고학पुरातत्त्वशास्त्रArheologijaArkeologiArcheologiaFornleifafræðiArcheologiaארכאולוגיהArkeologiარქეოლოგიაАрхеологияAkiolojiaບູຮານວິທະຍາArchaeologiaArheoloģijaArcheologijaRégészetАрхеологијаArkeologiArcheologie考古学ArkeologiArqueologiaلرغونپوهنهArchäologieArcheologiaArqueologiaArheologieАрхеологияपुरातत्त्वArkeologjiaපුරා විද්යාවArchaeologyArcheológiaArheologijaАрхеологијаArheologijaArkéologiArkeologiaArkeologiArkeolohiyaதொல்பொருளியல்โบราณคดีKhảo cổ họcArkeolojiArheologiýaАрхеологіяعلم الآثارVönotav(fiu-vro:Arkeoloogia)
ארכעאלאגיע(zh-yue:考古)(bat-smg:Arkeuoluogėjė)
考古学
(...as imported from WP)
article has not been saved locally