|
|
| (8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | [[Image:lighterstill.jpg]] | + | [[Image:lighterstill.jpg]][[File:Göbekli_Tepe,_Urfa.jpg|right|frame]] |
| − | [[Image:Monte Albán archeological site, Oaxaca.jpg|right|frame|<center>[[Monte Alban]] archaeological site</center>]] | |
| | | | |
| − | '''Archaeology''', '''archeology''', or '''archæology''' (from [[Greek language|Greek]]: ''αρχαιολογία'' - archaiologia, from ''αρχαίος'' - archaios, "primal, ancient, old" and ''λόγος'' - logos, "study") is the [[science]] that studies [[Homo (genus)|human]] [[culture]]s through the recovery, documentation, analysis and interpretation of material remains and environmental data, including [[architecture]], [[Artifact (archaeology)|artifacts]], features, [[biofact]]s, and [[cultural landscape|landscapes]]. Because archaeology's aim is to understand mankind, it is a humanistic endeavor. | + | '''Archaeology''', or archeology (from [[Greek]] ἀρχαιολογία, archaiologia – ἀρχαῖος, arkhaios, "[[ancient]]"; and -λογία, -logia, "-logy"), is the study of human activity, primarily through the recovery and [[analysis]] of the material [[culture]] and environmental data that they have left behind, which includes [[artifacts]], [[architecture]], biofacts and cultural landscapes (the archaeological record). Because archaeology employs a wide range of different procedures, it can be considered to be both a science and a humanity, and in the United States it is thought of as a branch of [[anthropology]], although in Europe it is viewed as a separate [[discipline]]. |
| | | | |
| − | 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 [[culture]]s, understanding [[culture history]], chronicling [[cultural evolution]], and studying human [[behavior]] and [[ecology]], for both [[prehistory|prehistoric]] and [[history|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]], [[geology]], [[physics]], [[information sciences]], [[chemistry]], [[statistics]], [[paleoecology]], [[paleontology]], [[paleozoology]], [[paleoethnobotany]], [[paleobotany]] .
| + | Archaeology studies human [[history]] from the development of the first stone [[tools]] in eastern Africa 3.4 million years ago up until recent decades. (Archaeology does not include the discipline of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleontology paleontology].) It is of most importance for learning about prehistoric societies, when there are no written records for historians to study, making up over 99% of total human history, from the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palaeolithic Palaeolithic] until the advent of literacy in any given society. Archaeology has various [[goals]], which range from studying human [[evolution]] to cultural evolution and understanding culture [[history]]. |
| | + | <center>For lessons on the [[topic]] of '''''Archaeology''''', follow [https://nordan.daynal.org/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Archaeology/TeaM '''''this link'''''].</center> |
| | + | The [[discipline]] involves surveyance, excavation and eventually [[analysis]] of data collected to learn more about the [[past]]. In broad scope, archaeology relies on cross-disciplinary [[research]]. It draws upon anthropology, history, art history, [[classics]], ethnology, [[geography]], [[geology]], [[linguistics]], semiology, [[physics]], [[information science]]s, [[chemistry]], statistics, paleoecology, paleontology, paleozoology, paleoethnobotany, and paleobotany. |
| | | | |
| − | ==Origins and definitions==
| + | Archaeology developed out of antiquarianism in Europe during the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/19th_century 19th century], and has since become a [[discipline]] practiced across the world. Since its early development, various specific sub-disciplines of archaeology have developed, including [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_archaeology maritime archaeology], feminist archaeology and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeoastronomy archaeoastronomy], and numerous different scientific techniques have been developed to aid archaeological investigation. Nonetheless, today, archaeologists face many problems, ranging from dealing with pseudoarchaeology to the looting of [[artifacts]] and opposition to the excavation of human remains. |
| − | In parts of [[Europe]] and the [[Old World]], the discipline has its roots in [[antiquarian]]ism and the study of [[Latin]] and [[Ancient Greek]], and so has a natural affinity with the field of [[history]].
| |
| | | | |
| − | [[Shen Kuo#Archaeology|Archaeology in ancient China]] developed from antiquarian pursuits as well, specifically from the [[Scholar-bureaucrats|scholar-official]]'s desires to revive the use of ancient relics in state ritual. This pursuit of his [[Society of the Song Dynasty#Social class|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 [[interdisciplinarity|interdisciplinary]] approach. 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.<ref name="ebrey 148">Ebrey, 148 (1999).</ref> | + | The [[purpose]] of archaeology is to learn more about [[past]] societies and the development of the [[human]] race. Over 99% of the history of [[humanity]] has occurred within [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistory prehistoric cultures], who did not make use of [[writing]], thereby not leaving written [[records]] about themselves that we can study today. Without such written sources, the only way to learn about prehistoric societies is to use archaeology. Many important developments in human history occurred during prehistory, including the [[evolution]] of [[humanity]] during the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palaeolithic Palaeolithic] period, when the hominins developed from the australopithecines through to the early homos in Africa and finally into [[modern]] Homo sapiens. Archaeology also sheds light on many of [[humanity]]'s technological advances, for instance the ability to use fire, the development of stone [[tools]], the discovery of metallurgy, the beginnings of [[religion]] and the creation of [[agriculture]]. Without archaeology, we would know little or nothing about the use of material culture by [[humanity]] that pre-dates [[writing]]. |
| | | | |
| − | The study of [[Egyptology]] began in medieval [[History of Arab Egypt|Islamic Egypt]], where [[Muslim historians]] attempted to learn about [[ancient Egypt]]ian 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 [[Copt]]ic priests in their time. [[Abd-el-latif|Abdul Latif al-Baghdadi]], a teacher at [[Cairo]]'s [[Al-Azhar University]] in the 13th century, wrote detailed descriptions on [[Ancient Egyptian architecture|ancient Egyptian monuments]].<ref name=Daly>Dr. Okasha El Daly (2005), ''Egyptology: The Missing Millennium: Ancient Egypt in Medieval Arabic Writings'', [[University College London|UCL Press]], ISBN 1844720632. ([[cf.]] [http://www.muslimheritage.com/topics/default.cfm?ArticleID=481 Arabic Study of Ancient Egypt], Foundation for Science Technology and Civilisation.)</ref> Similarly, the 15th-century Egyptian historian [[Al-Maqrizi]] wrote detailed accounts of Egyptian antiquities.
| + | However, it is not only prehistoric, pre-literate [[cultures]] that can be studied using archaeology but [[historic]], literate cultures as well, through the sub-discipline of historical archaeology. For many literate cultures, such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece Ancient Greece] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesopotamia Mesopotamia], their surviving records are often incomplete and 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 a small fraction of the larger [[population]]. Hence, written [[records]] cannot be trusted as a sole source. The material record may be closer to a fair [[representation]] of [[society]], though it is subject to its own biases, such as sampling bias and differential preservation. |
| | | | |
| − | In [[North America]] archaeology is one of the four sub-fields, or [[Anthropology#branches of anthropology|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 [[genetics|genetic]] characteristics.
| + | There is no one singular approach to [[archaeological]] [[theory]] that has been adhered to by all archaeologists. When archaeology developed in the late [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/19th_century 19th century], the first approach to archaeological [[theory]] to be [[practiced]] was that of cultural-history archaeology, which held the goal of explaining why cultures changed and adapted rather than just highlighting the [[fact]] that they did, therefore emphasizing historical particularism. In the early [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20th_century 20th century], many archaeologists who studied past societies with direct continuing links to existing ones (such as those of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas Native Americans], Siberians, Mesoamericans etc.) followed the direct historical approach, compared the [[continuity]] between the [[past]] and contemporary ethnic and cultural groups. In the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960's 1960s], an archaeological movement largely led by American archaeologists like Lewis Binford and Kent Flannery arose that rebelled against the established cultural-history archaeology. 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. |
| | | | |
| − | ==History of archaeology==
| + | In the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980's 1980s], a new [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism postmodern] movement arose led by the British archaeologists Michael Shanks, Christopher Tilley, Daniel Miller, and Ian Hodder, which has become known as post-processual archaeology. It questioned processualism's appeals to scientific positivism and impartiality, and emphasised the importance of a more self-critical theoretical reflexivity. However, this approach has been criticized by processualists as lacking scientific rigor, and the validity of both processualism and post-processualism is still under [[debate]]. Meanwhile, another [[theory]], known as historical processualism has emerged seeking to incorporate a [[focus]] on process and post-processual archaeology's emphasis of reflexivity and [[history]]. |
| − | 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.
| + | Archaeological theory now borrows from a wide range of [[influences]], including [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution neo-Darwinian evolutionary thought], phenomenology, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology postmodernism], agency theory, cognitive science, Structural functionalism, gender-based and Feminist archaeology, and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_theory_in_archaeology Systems theory].[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology] |
| − | | |
| − | [[Johann Joachim Winckelmann]] is called "the prophet and founding hero of modern archaeology,".<ref>[[Daniel J. Boorstin]], ''The Discoverers'', p. 584, Random House (New York, 1983)</ref> 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==
| |
| − | [[Image:Stonehenge.jpg|frame|<center>[[Stonehenge]]</center>]]
| |
| − | 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 [[civilization]]s. In contrast [[Homo Sapiens|Homo sapiens]] has existed for at least 200,000 years, and other species of [[Homo (genus)|Homo]] for millions of years (see [[Human evolution]]). These [[civilization]]s 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 [[city|cities]] – must come from archaeology.<ref>[http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/kevin.greene/wintro Kevin Greene - ''Archaeology: an Introduction'']</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | 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 [[aristocracy|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 [[library|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 (1999 film)|''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-history archaeology|cultural, or culture, history]]. It is best known for its emphasis on [[historical particularism]].<ref name="autogenerated1">Trigger (1989)</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | In the 1920s in the American Southwest cultural historical archaeology was intimately tied with the [[direct historical approach]].<ref name="autogenerated1" /> 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, [[ethnohistory|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. 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]]''.
| |
| − | | |
| − | In the 1980s, a new [[postmodern]] movement arose led by the British archaeologists [[Michael Shanks (archaeologist)|Michael Shanks]],<ref name=Shanks_Tilley1987>Shanks and Tilley (1987)</ref><ref name=Shanks_Tilley1988>Shanks and Tilley (1988)</ref><ref name=Shanks1991>Shanks (1991)</ref><ref name=Shanks1993>Shanks (1993)</ref> [[Christopher Tilley]],<ref name=Tilley1993>Tilley (1993)</ref> [[Daniel Miller (anthropologist)|Daniel Miller]],<ref name=Miller_Tilley1984>Miller and Tilley1984</ref><ref name=Miller_etal1989>Miller et al. (1989)</ref> and [[Ian Hodder]].<ref name=Hodder1982>Hodder (1982)</ref><ref name=Hodder1985>Hodder (1985)</ref><ref name=Hodder1987>Hodder (1987)</ref><ref name=Hodder1990>Hodder (1990)</ref><ref name=Hodder1991>Hodder (1991)</ref><ref name=Hodder1992>Hodder (1992)</ref> It questioned processualism's appeals to scientific positivism and impartiality, and emphasised the importance of a more self-critical theoretical [[reflexivity]]. 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.<ref name=Pauketat2001>Pauketat (2001)</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Archaeological theory now borrows from a wide range of influences, including [[evolution|neo-Darwinian evolutionary thought]], [[phenomenology]], [[postmodernism]], [[Structure and agency|agency theory]], [[Cognitive archaeology|cognitive science]], [[Functionalism (sociology)|Functionalism]], [[Gender archaeology|gender-based]] and [[Feminist archaeology]], and [[Systems theory in archaeology|Systems theory]].
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Methods==
| |
| − | ===Survey===
| |
| − | A modern archaeological project often begins with a [[archaeological survey|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 [[midden]]s, 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]],<ref name=Willey1953>Willey (1953)</ref><ref name=Willey1968>Willey (1968)</ref> and survey of all levels became prominent with the rise of processual archaeology some years later.<ref name=Billmand_Feinman1999>Billman and Feinman (1999)</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | 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 (statistics)|sampling]] methods.)<ref name=Redman1974>Redman (1974)</ref> 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 pattern]]s and settlement structure. Survey data are commonly assembled into [[map]]s, 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 [[auger]]s, [[corer]]s, and [[shovel test]] pits.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Aerial survey]] is conducted using [[camera]]s attached to [[airplane]]s, [[balloon (aircraft)|balloon]]s, or even [[kite]]s. 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. [[Plant]]s 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 [[midden]]s) may develop more rapidly. Photographs of ripening [[cereal|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. [[Magnetometer]]s detect minute deviations in the [[Earth's magnetic field]] caused by [[iron]] artifacts, [[kiln]]s, 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 detector]]s 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===
| |
| − | [[Excavation|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 [[Harris matrix#Harris' Laws of Archaeological Stratigraphy|Primary Laws of Archaeology]]). Similarly, their [[archaeological association|association]], or [[relationship (archaeology)|relationship]] with nearby objects and [[feature (archaeology)|features]], needs to be recorded for later analysis. This allows the archaeologist to deduce what [[Artifact (archaeology)|artifacts]] and features were likely used together and which may be from different [[archaeological phase|phases]] of activity. For example, excavation of a site reveals its [[stratigraphy]]; if a site was occupied by a succession of distinct [[culture]]s, 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 [[ethics|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 (statistics)|Sampling]] is even more important in excavation than in survey. It is common for large mechanical equipment, such as [[backhoe]]s ([[J. C. Bamford|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 [[trowel]]s or [[hoe (tool)|hoes]] to ensure that all features are apparent.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The next task is to form a [[Archaeological plan|site plan]] and then use it to help decide the method of excavation. Features dug into the [[Archaeological natural|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 (archaeology)|cut]] and the [[Fill (archaeology)|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 [[Archaeological section|sections]] of individual features are all drawn on site, black and white and colour photographs of them are taken, and [[Single context recording|recording]] sheets are filled in describing the [[Archaeological context|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 [[typology|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 [[Deciphering|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 [[academia|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 (archaeology)|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.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Ethnoarchaeology===
| |
| − | [[Ethnoarchaeology]] is the archaeological study of living people.<ref name =Gould1971a>Gould (1971a)</ref><ref name=Gould1971b>Gould (1971b)</ref><ref name=Yellen1972>Yellen (1972)</ref><ref name=Yellen1977>Yellen (1977)</ref><ref name=Gould_Yellen1987>Gould and Yellen 1987</ref><ref name=Yellen1991>Yellen (1991)</ref> 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.<ref name=Sillet_et_al2006>Sillet et al. (2006)</ref><ref Name=Schott_Sillitoe2005>Schott and Sillitoe (2005)</ref><ref name=Ogundele2005>Ogundele (2005)</ref><ref name=kuznar2001>Kuznar (2001)</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===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.<ref name=Ascher1961>Ascher (1961)</ref><ref name=Saraydar_Shimada1971>Saraydar and Shimada (1971)</ref><ref name=Saraydar_Shimada1973>Saraydar and Shimada (1973)</ref><ref name=Gifford-Gonzalez_et_al1985>Gifford-Gonzalez (1985)</ref><ref name=Frison1989>Frison (1989)</ref> In the context of the context of the logical positivism of processualism with its goals of improving the scientific rigor of archaeological [[epistemological|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.<ref name=Glasscock_et_al1994>Glascock et al. 1994</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Cultural resources management===
| |
| − | 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 Britain<ref>[http://www.sogaer.ex.ac.uk/archaeology/modules/arc3600.shtml The University of Exeter - SoGAER - Department of Archaeology<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>. 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]]<ref>[http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningpolicyguidance9 Planning Policy Guidance 16: Archaeology and planning - Planning, building and the environment - Communities and Local Government<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> has required planners to consider archaeology as a [[material consideration]] in determining applications for new development. As a result, numerous archaeological organisations undertake [[rescue archaeology|mitigation work]] in advance of (or during) construction work in archaeologically sensitive areas, at the [[polluter pays principle|developer's expense]].
| |
| − | | |
| − | In [[England]], ultimate responsibility of care for the historic environment rests with the [[Department for Culture, Media and Sport]]<ref>[http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/Historic_environment/ Department for Culture Media and Sport - historic environment<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> in association with [[English Heritage]]<ref>[http://www.english-heritage.org.uk English Heritage - Stonehenge & the History of England : English Heritage<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>. In [[Scotland]], [[Wales]] and [[Northern Ireland]], the same responsibilities lie with [[Historic Scotland]]<ref>[http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/ Historic Scotland<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>, [[Cadw]]<ref>[http://www.cadw.wales.gov.uk/default.asp Cadw<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> and the [[Environment and Heritage Service|Environment and Heritage Service (Northern Ireland)]]<ref>[http://www.ehsni.gov.uk/built.htm Built Environment<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> 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 [[postdoctoral|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"<ref name=Flannery1982>Flannery (1982)</ref> 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 (1999 movie)|''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 [[archaeological survey|survey]], [[excavation]], and [[archaeological data processing|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 (serier)|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{{Fact|date=October 2007}}. 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'''.<ref>http://www.sonoma.edu/asc/roadshow.html</ref> 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. 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 [[construction|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-processual archaeology|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==
| |
| − | [[Image:Adad-Nirari stela.jpg|frame|right|[[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 [[hoard]]s of buried treasure is an ancient problem. For instance, many of the tombs of the Egyptian [[pharaoh]]s 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.<ref name="autogenerated2">Sheets (1973)</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Popular consciousness often associates looting with poor [[Third World]] countries, but this is a false assumption.<ref name="autogenerated2" /> 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.<ref name=Hodge1937>Hodge (1937)</ref> The first conviction of the transport of artifacts illegally removed from private property under the [http://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/FHPL_ArchRsrcsProt.pdf 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.<ref name=Munson_et_al1995>Munson et al. (1995)</ref>
| |
| − | <!-- Comment -->
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Descendant peoples==
| |
| − | In the United States, examples such as the case of [[Kennewick Man]] have illustrated the tensions between [[Native Americans in the United States|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 [[Artifact (archaeology)|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]], [[tool]]s and [[weapons]], were originally excavated from various sites in the [[Ottawa Valley]], including [[Morrison Island|Morrison]] and the [[Allumette Island]]s. 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 pelt]]s.
| |
| − | | |
| − | 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.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/magazine/SO05/indepth/archaeology.asp | title= Canadian Geographic Online }}</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Kennewick Man]] is another repatriation candidate that has been the source of heated debate.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Lists===
| |
| − | * [[List of archaeological periods]]
| |
| − | * [[List of archaeological sites sorted by country]]
| |
| − | * [[List of archaeologists]]
| |
| − | * [[List of prominent paleoethnobotanists]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Related topics===
| |
| − | * [[Archaeoacoustics]]
| |
| − | * [[Archaeological sub-disciplines]]
| |
| − | * [[Area of archaeological potential]]
| |
| − | * [[Biblical archaeology]]
| |
| − | * [[GIS in archaeology]]
| |
| − | * [[Grave robbing]]
| |
| − | * [[Virtual artifact]]
| |
| − | * [[Harris matrix]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Further reading==
| |
| − | *[[Archaeology (magazine)]]
| |
| − | *[[Internet Archaeology]] e-journal
| |
| − | *[[International Journal of South American Archaeology - IJSA (magazine)]]
| |
| − | *[[Lewis Binford]] - ''New Perspectives in Archaeology'' (1968) ISBN 0-202-33022-2
| |
| − | *[[Glyn Daniel]] - ''A Short History of Archaeology'' (1991)
| |
| − | *Kevin Greene - ''Introduction to Archaeology'' (1983)
| |
| − | *Thomas Hester, Harry Shafer, and Kenneth L. Feder - ''Field Methods in Archaeology'' 7th edition (1997)
| |
| − | *C. U. Larsen - ''Sites and Monuments'' (1992)
| |
| − | *[[Colin Renfrew]] & Paul Bahn - ''Archaeology: theories, methods and practice'' 2nd edition (1996)
| |
| − | *Robert J. Sharer & Wendy Ashmore - ''Archaeology: Discovering our Past'' 2nd edition (1993)
| |
| − | *[[David Hurst Thomas]] - ''Archaeology'' 3rd. edition (1998)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==External links==
| |
| − | * [http://pastscape.org.uk 400,000 records of archaeological sites and architecture in England]
| |
| − | * [http://www.civilisations.ca/archeo/archeoe.asp The Archaeological section of the Canadian Museum of Civilization]
| |
| − | * [http://www.saa.org The Society for American Archaeology]
| |
| − | * [http://www.worldarchaeologicalcongress.org/site/about.php The World Archaeological Congress]
| |
| − | * [http://www.archaeological.org/ The Archaeological Institute of America]
| |
| − | * [http://www.aaanet.org/ad/index.html The Archaeology Division of the American Anthropological Association]
| |
| − | * [http://www.archaeologynews.org Archaeological news updated daily]
| |
| − | * [http://www.britarch.ac.uk Council for British Archaeology]
| |
| − | * [http://www.fastionline.org Fasti Online - an online database of archaeological sites]
| |
| − | * [http://www.asor.org The American Schools of Oriental Research]
| |
| | | | |
| | [[Category: General Reference]] | | [[Category: General Reference]] |
| | [[Category: Archaeology]] | | [[Category: Archaeology]] |
Archaeology, or archeology (from Greek ἀρχαιολογία, archaiologia – ἀρχαῖος, arkhaios, "ancient"; and -λογία, -logia, "-logy"), is the study of human activity, primarily through the recovery and analysis of the material culture and environmental data that they have left behind, which includes artifacts, architecture, biofacts and cultural landscapes (the archaeological record). Because archaeology employs a wide range of different procedures, it can be considered to be both a science and a humanity, and in the United States it is thought of as a branch of anthropology, although in Europe it is viewed as a separate discipline.
Archaeology studies human history from the development of the first stone tools in eastern Africa 3.4 million years ago up until recent decades. (Archaeology does not include the discipline of paleontology.) It is of most importance for learning about prehistoric societies, when there are no written records for historians to study, making up over 99% of total human history, from the Palaeolithic until the advent of literacy in any given society. Archaeology has various goals, which range from studying human evolution to cultural evolution and understanding culture history.
For lessons on the topic of Archaeology, follow this link.
The discipline involves surveyance, excavation and eventually analysis of data collected to learn more about the past. In broad scope, archaeology relies on cross-disciplinary research. It draws upon anthropology, history, art history, classics, ethnology, geography, geology, linguistics, semiology, physics, information sciences, chemistry, statistics, paleoecology, paleontology, paleozoology, paleoethnobotany, and paleobotany.
Archaeology developed out of antiquarianism in Europe during the 19th century, and has since become a discipline practiced across the world. Since its early development, various specific sub-disciplines of archaeology have developed, including maritime archaeology, feminist archaeology and archaeoastronomy, and numerous different scientific techniques have been developed to aid archaeological investigation. Nonetheless, today, archaeologists face many problems, ranging from dealing with pseudoarchaeology to the looting of artifacts and opposition to the excavation of human remains.
The purpose of archaeology is to learn more about past societies and the development of the human race. Over 99% of the history of humanity has occurred within prehistoric cultures, who did not make use of writing, thereby not leaving written records about themselves that we can study today. Without such written sources, the only way to learn about prehistoric societies is to use archaeology. Many important developments in human history occurred during prehistory, including the evolution of humanity during the Palaeolithic period, when the hominins developed from the australopithecines through to the early homos in Africa and finally into modern Homo sapiens. Archaeology also sheds light on many of humanity's technological advances, for instance the ability to use fire, the development of stone tools, the discovery of metallurgy, the beginnings of religion and the creation of agriculture. Without archaeology, we would know little or nothing about the use of material culture by humanity that pre-dates writing.
However, it is not only prehistoric, pre-literate cultures that can be studied using archaeology but historic, literate cultures as well, through the sub-discipline of historical archaeology. For many literate cultures, such as Ancient Greece and Mesopotamia, their surviving records are often incomplete and 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 a small fraction of the larger population. Hence, written records cannot be trusted as a sole source. The material record may be closer to a fair representation of society, though it is subject to its own biases, such as sampling bias and differential preservation.
There is no one singular approach to archaeological theory that has been adhered to by all archaeologists. When archaeology developed in the late 19th century, the first approach to archaeological theory to be practiced was that of cultural-history archaeology, which held the goal of explaining why cultures changed and adapted rather than just highlighting the fact that they did, therefore emphasizing historical particularism. In the early 20th century, many archaeologists who studied past societies with direct continuing links to existing ones (such as those of Native Americans, Siberians, Mesoamericans etc.) followed the direct historical approach, compared the continuity between the past and contemporary ethnic and cultural groups. In the 1960s, an archaeological movement largely led by American archaeologists like Lewis Binford and Kent Flannery arose that rebelled against the established cultural-history archaeology. 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.
In the 1980s, a new postmodern movement arose led by the British archaeologists Michael Shanks, Christopher Tilley, Daniel Miller, and Ian Hodder, which has become known as post-processual archaeology. It questioned processualism's appeals to scientific positivism and impartiality, and emphasised the importance of a more self-critical theoretical reflexivity. However, this approach has been criticized by processualists as lacking scientific rigor, and the validity of both processualism and post-processualism is still under debate. Meanwhile, another theory, known as historical processualism has emerged seeking to incorporate a focus on process and post-processual archaeology's emphasis of reflexivity and history.
Archaeological theory now borrows from a wide range of influences, including neo-Darwinian evolutionary thought, phenomenology, postmodernism, agency theory, cognitive science, Structural functionalism, gender-based and Feminist archaeology, and Systems theory.[1]
