trigger+ 2006 + +chapter+1+ +studying+history+of+arch

8/3/2019 Trigger+ 2006 + +Chapter+1+ +Studying+History+of+Arch

1/21

BRUCE G TGG

A History

of

chaeological

Toug

Second iton


2/21

CHAPTER

tudying the Histr f Achaelgy

Tough there exis one major academic indust. telling the

social scientists how they can turn themselves into genuine scientits, there exits another, with at least as ourishing anoutpu putatively establishing that the study of man and sociecannot be scientic

ERN . S T GL , eltivsm nd the ocl cec ( 1985) p. 120

Sice the I5S achaeology, especialy i Noth Aeica and westernEuope has shied from a seemigly complacet cultue-hstoicalothodox to ambitious heoecal inovatos These innovatoshave led to gowig isagreemets about te goals of te iscipliea how these goals can be achieve. Iceasig mbes of achae

ologists, folloig i the wae of hstoians and sociologists haveabanone posivist cetait and begu to etetain doubts aboutthe objectivit of thei eseach They see social factos as deteming


3/21


4/21

Ato of Achaeoogca Thoght

istoric-acconts in te Hebrew Bible Elsewhere German andPois arcaeologists engaged in polemics about weter eLusaian cultre ad been created by preistoric Germans or Slavs Asrecenl as e 1970s,Peter Gaake,a governmentemployed arcaeologst i Sotern Rodesia, found s positon no longer tenable becase e resed to cast doubt on conclsive arcaeological ev

dence tat stone rins tat pat of central ca ad been bt by ancestors of te Bant peoples wo lve in tat regon Today,e ndngs of ecologica araeologists are beng coopted bot b conseraionsts d by tose wo are axos to ze legalresats on envronmental polluon and degradaton

My adopon of a stoic perspecive does not mean tat I clai an pileed stats wit respct to objectivty for suc anpproac Historical interpretatons are notoosly conjecta and

openended, to e extent t at some i storians ave caacterizedte merely expressions of persona opinon It is also recogzed at, because of te abndace of storical data, evidence can be

electvel arsaled to "prove amost anyting Tere may,owver be soe rut n Willm cNeil's (1986: 64) rgment tat,veniistorcal nterpretaton is a form of ytmang,sc mytselp to guide publc acton and can be r egarded as a an sbstteDr insct If is so it follows tat tey are subject to te operaon of te soci eqivalent of naral selecton ad ence ay morelosel approxmate reait over long periods of time Tis,oever,s a tenos basis on wic to base opes for te objecvty of soricl tepretaons

I erefore do not cla tat te istoical stdy presented ere; an Ore objectve tn are te interpretaons of arcaeologia or enological data at it exaes I beee, owever, as doan oters o stdy e istor of arcolog tat a istori approac oers a special vantage pont m wc to examinee cangig relaons beteen arcaeological terpretaton and itsCil d clr ilie Te me perspectve provides a erentsis for studng te ies between caeology and society tan doilosopical or sociological approaces In parclar,it perits tesearcer to iden te inuence of sbjectve factors b obseingw and nder wat circustances interpretaons of te arcaeogica record ave canged. Aloug is does not elinate te as of e obserer or te possibi tat tis bias wll uence

4

Stdng the sto of chaeoog

te iterpretaton of arcaeological dat,it creases e cances ofgning more rounded insigts into wat appened in e past

Aproachestoth History ofArchaeology

Theneed for a moresstemaic studyofthehstor ofarchaeological

nterpretaonis indicatedbserious disagreements abotth

e nature

andsignicance ofhat histor Mcofecontrovers centerson

te roleplaed by explnatoninhe std ofachaeologic data

overthe last two centries

Some historians of rchaeology beieve hatthe scipline has

evolved in a predetermined nanner togh a series of stages

(Schwartz 196; Fitng 1973) InAHistory ofAmericanArchaeology,

GRWilleyandJ. A. Sablo (1974,1980) posited an ial Spec-

latve period (1492- 840) followed by ClassicatoyDescripive

(1840-1914),ClassicatoHistorical (1914-1960) and Explaatoy

(1960-) ones Ths schemeas based nparton Doglas Schartz's

(1967) previos visionofhehistorofAmerica archaeolog nto

threestages: Speculave,Empirical,and Explaator Onlyine

1993edionofAHistory ofAmercanArchaeologywas e nl

period,whichbegan in 1960,renamede odernone lthough

his series ofstages was appliedonly to Ne World achaeolo,

Willey and Sablo (974: 09-10)obseredhattheirscheme was

lel to appl evehere The proposed t over he course

of 150years archaeolog had deelopedaccordingto an indctve

Baconian model ofdoingsciencewhichvolvesstcollectng data

en describingadclassig it,and nal tng to explnit. Yet

hs approach does notaccotfor whyarchaeological ndngs were

alread hig controversial dig the neteen centu Schdebates wereonl possible becasevaous con

clusions abot the

past werealready being drawn on hebasis ofavaiableevidence and

someofese conclusionswere oending people.lso,iarchaeolo

gists could not drawn conclusions,what moivatedhem tocon

inetostd e past ortocoecttifacts? As e Brishhistorian

E H. Carr (967: 3-35) has reded s e merecharacterization

ofdata as being relevant orirrelevant,that occrsevenin emost

descripvehistocl stdies,implies he exstenceofsome nd of

theorecal amework It can ter bearged inopposiion to te

ideaofa neal obseraona languagehat noteven hesimplest

5


5/21


6/21


7/21


8/21


9/21

AHst fAchaeooga Thoght

internaist chaeolog (Yellowhor 2002), worngclass archaeolog (McGre and Recer 200), touristic archaeolog, ad thearchaelogies of protest (Silberma 1995 261), of he isefrachise, ad of culral idett (Schan 2001) The st might tech-ncally incude gender archaeoogy although this approach is der-ent because, instead of sipy represenng an aternative focus ofresearch, it as established itself as a necessar and tegral par of aloher archaeologies Althoug no o exapes of any one of thesevaried approaches to archaeoog are identical, they share sucentfeatures to ident each approach as a isctive pe, the developent ad nction of whch are worhy of sty

Yet ieas dse ad covergent as wel as independent evelop-ment characterze archaeology. Sudies of achaeoog, with a fewnotable exceptios (1. Beral 1980 Chakrabart 1982), have faileto ake accot of he ast telectual exchange hat characterizehe developent of archaeology in al parts of the world urg henineteent and entieth centuries This is dramacall iusrate

by he ear stuy of shel ounds Reports of the pioneering sudiesb Dash scholars who began their work the 1840, smuatea arge number of ivestigaions of shel heaps along the Aaticand later the Pacic coasts of North America in te latter half ofhe nineteenh cent (Trigger 1986a). e te Amercan zool-ogist Edwrd Morse wet to teach in Japan, aer alyzing mate-ria fro she mouds along he coast of Maine for he ararUnversi archaeoogst Jees Wan, he iscovered and exca-

vated in 1877 a arge Mesolthc she deposit at Omori, near Toko.Some of his stuents dug aother shel moud by heselves an itwas not long before Japanese archaeologists who ha been educated

in Europe estabished the sudy of he Mesoihic J omon ctureon a professio basis (IkawaSmith 1982). The Scaninaan studies also stimuated the eary invesgaon of she ouns Brazil(Ihering 895 an Southest Asia (Earl 1863) Even e ideologcally opposed archaeological traditions of Western Europe ad theSoviet on sigcan luenced each oer, despite decades

when scientc contact of a sort was ver dcut and pocallydangerous for schoars o both sides of the Iron Curta. For alltese reasons it seems unise to overestiate te historica de-penence or theoreical disctiveness of these regioa archaeolo-gies Oe of he important tasks for hstorians of archaeolog is to

S e Hst f ce

deteine to whatextent evelopents in oneregion d or d not

inueceevelopmets esewhere. For ey mes, is is hard too

becausearchaeologists oen fale to cate he soces of her

ieasLess attenton hasbee pai to the eects ofiscipnary specia

izaonwthn archaeoogy on te ays in whicharchaeologcl data

are interprete (Rouse 1972: 125) Yetieringorientaios along

theselinesmay accountfor as mny ierencesas o soci apoit-ical orientaionsClassia archaeolog, Egptolog an Assyriolog

have bee stronglcommtetostuyingepigraphyan arthsto

wihin a historica amewor (Bietak 1979) Medieva archaeolog

develpe as an nvestgation ofmaterial remains that complements

research base on written records M. Thompson 1967; D M. Wso

1976 Bare1977 Arn1998) Palaeolihc rchaeoogdevelope

aongside storic geoogyand paaeontoloy ahasmaite

close ieswitl these dsciplines, whereas the stuy of ater prehs-

torc perodsequenty combines iforation om numerous oter

disciplines, incuding inguiscs, folore biologica anhropolog,

and comparativeethnoog, th archaeoogical dgs(DMcCal1964; Trigger 1968a Jennigs 1979)

Yet,although maofthese tpesofarchaeologhaeevelope

i considerable inteecual isolation o each oher over ong peri-

odsan have been rther estraged as a resut ofhe balaizatio of

theirrespective jargons, historica connections, sporadc interaction,

and commonIehoologic terests have een scient fora of

themtoshare numerous interpretiveconceptsmrray(200a

xixxx points out hat, espite archaeolog's great versi, the

comon quesons a damena acvities,suchas classicaton,

that lie at te core ofarchaeoogyenable archaeologists tocmu-nicate wth each other anexchge knowledge Yet, although hey

share a general commitment to makng the h past ntelgible

an to developing te iteectal tools requed for s task, arcae-

ologists have gone about dog their work in may dierentways a

have sought to use archaeologto sere may dferent poic d

ctura ends.More narrowly focuse sues ofthe storofarchaeology exam

ine the role payed by instttons, such as archaeoogic societies

adarchaeologica epartents in museums or unversities, in pro

motg the development ofrchaeoogy chael O'Brien, R. Lee

S


10/21

A Histor of Achaeooc Thought

Lymn, and Micha Scr (2005 hav acd t dvpmnt Nw rchag in trms th cntrbutins individu archagists ad custrs cprang r cmpting archagists.Micha B tr 2005 has studid aga O th prs pctiv thindivdu parcipants, h intractv tam that has bn xcavatingat th ry Nithic sit Gata6yk in Turky undr th innvatv adrship Ia Hddr This n-graid yp apprach

rvas much abut th sci dynamics and acadmic stratgis tathav shapd bradr trnds in th dvpmnt archag

Bigraphy and autbigraphy hav ng bn pt th histr archag, but thy ha gnra bn vid as a mans cbraig r jusng th crs invidua archagistsTday thr is grng intrst in using a bigraphica appracht nvsiat hw chagists hav intrprtd h past JhnChapma 1998 xpns h r that th r xprincs thLithuananbrn archagist Maria imbutas payd i sapinghr intrprtans Eurp prhist, spciy th disncn

tat sh drw bwn what sh bivd had bna.matrichaLnd

pac Eay Eurp and th patriarcha and wark In-Eurpasocitis at rpacd it aPau S7I-I92) prd dta th prbms ts srt apprach i his invatv "ttabigraphy h Frnch nvist ustav Faubrt H shwd hwFaubrt was shapd by th cutur in which h vd ad th sciacass t which h bngd H as dmnstratd hwvr, thatmany aspcts Faubrt's ad writings cud ny b undrstdby mans a dtaid psychgica anaysis his chidhd adamiy ratins ary, i w ar undrstand aspcts whatarchagists d, w hav t study thl as idividuas S s wrk

mas it car hat bcaus psychgica actrs vn archaists wh shar simiar thnic and cass backgrunds and th samhistrica xprincs r u t itrprt archagic data inprcisy th san1 mannr. B cnrast, anagus cia and cutra cntxts prduc gnra simiariis t intprtan archagica data tat ar dsing cnsidran

hugh bigraphic and scipitca prspctivs n th hist archag ar cmpmntar sm th spcic apprachs utind abv ar cntradictr nd hnc nt a thmcan b vaid Bcaus hs sudy attmpts t rac th dvpmt archaic thught m a brad prspctv it is impssib

16

Studyg e so o chaeoo

r it t xamin t cnrbutns a archagsts r vn tinvsgat systmaicay th dvpmnts hat hav takn pacin ach cOr d ach branch archag (chuyr 197) .Instad, I invstigat a nmbr ar intrv trnds inrughy h cngica rdr in hich thy can nt prminncThs rnds quty vappd and intractd th n anrbth tmpray nd rapcay and wrk indvidua

archagsts n rcts svra ths trnds, ihr at rnt stags carrs r in sm cmbinan at a sing pint inim thmac apprach as a histrca study t ta accunt chngn sys rchaic itrprtn that cannt bttd t car dnd crngica r ggrapca pigns but at rct wavs nvatin that hav ransdarcha

Social Context

No onedenies that archaeoogicalresearch is nuencedby any dif-

ferent kinds of factors The ost controversia of ese is the socia

context i which archaeoogists ive and work:. Ver few archae-

oogists, incuding those who favor a posivisic view of scienic

research, od ree ct the proposa that the quesions archaeoogists

ask e inuenced at east to some degree by tis miieu Yet posi-

vsts Iantn at so ongasadequatedata are availabe and hese

dataae azed using properscnicmehods,he vaidiof t1e

resun concusions is dependent of te preudces or beefs of

the invesator.Oter archaeoogistsbeieve hat because their ds

cipine's ndgs concernng he past consciousy or unconsciousy

are perceived to haveimplicaions for the present or about huma

naturegenery,and because people easilyaccept what tey ant to

beieve but demand overhemng evidence b efore he accept ideas

that they nd abhorrent, changin socia condions uence not

onythe questons archaeoogists ask but so the ansers at tey

are presposed to d acceptable . Evenstastica tests,because tey

employarbirar leves ofcodence are open tosubjective interpre

taon Strongpositivists, who beeve at a singe excepton vali-

dates a aw would heoreticyhave to examie a p ossibecasesto

prove that hey are dealing w a universa eneraizaton. Because

such proofis normay possible,fat is aso invoved ere


11/21


12/21


13/21

A Hso o Acaeolocal Tout

archaeologsts undertake. To obtan support archaeologists mustplease heir sponsors wheer hese be wealy parons (Hnsley

I 98 S ) olleagues and polians managing e oton of pul nds (Patterson I986a 999, or he genera pb There aso

may be soial resrions on exavang ertain ids of sites suchas emeteries or religious loles To protect culura resoures

governents frequently enat sringent onrols over when and how

archaeologsts eavate ad how hey reord heir ndngs Theysomeimes revent arhaeologists om sening even unne nds

sh as sol saples aro for analyss There s also growing tendency to ssgn responsibi for nagng rcheooga researh

to loal or eni groups on e grouns at suh resores are partof er ertage Athogh my arhaeologists acept ese onrolsas approprate they may mpose major onstrants on e reseh

arhaeologss do ad ow ey nterpret heir nds uch onsraints

have gven rse to onsiderable tensions beeen archaeologists nd

aborginal resore managers Moser 1995b; Nchoas nd Anrews

I 997 wiler et al 99 D Thomas 2000Un he wentieh cen few arcaeologists were edcate inhe disiplne nstead hey brought to achaeolog a vre of skillsad ewpoints aquired i many derent elds an avoations. All

of hem had sdied a generl shool currulum in wich classa

and bilica materal was emphasized Bas pinples derived from

a wdespread interest in numsmaics played an importnt role n

te evelopnent of polog nd seraion by Crisan Thomsen

Jon Evans and oher early archaeologsts (McK I976 n tenineteent enr a growg number who took p he stdy of

rchaeolog had been rter euate in e pysi n ologia

siences Even now it is lamed hat sgniat erences an benoted beeen he work done by professiona arcaeologists whosenergdate sies were n he es and n the ntural si

enes R Chapm 9 79 : I 2 I More eceny a large numer ofpretorc areologsts have been edate n anropolog or itOepartents dependng on loa preferences n general arhaeol

ogists raned hin e contet of histo reman itrested n hepass of spei onres or peoples whereas arceologists raed

i anhropology are ore ely to be ntereste n sdyng he past

from a comparave perspeive

Studi e Histo ocaeolo

Te roles played by partiularly sessl or hisa arae

ologists as eemplars in shapng e price of acaeology on a

naona an an ternaional scae aso are signiant even i hey

probaly develope heir deas in ontets at were ferte to hoseieas Yonger arc heologs ts my srike o in new irecions andponeer novel tehnques of aayss or nterpretaon i order to r

to estaish professona repuaons fo hemselves

Arcaeologia nterpretaon so has een nence y tenia developments in he pysia n iologica senes n

reent deaes wen ollaboraive resear involvin haeologsts

nd natra siensts beame rote w rare expons e ow

of informaon beeen ese dscpnes was ueona w

rhaeologsts being he repents Hene resear in e natrasienes was only foruitously related to e nees of araeolo

gists alhog from me t o ie dsoveres were ade at were o ftremendos iportane for arhaeolog Te evelopnent of radio

aron and oer geochronomer dang tehqes er Wo

War rovded arhaeologsts for e rst ime th a unversayappliable hronolog that alowed he approxmate year as we

as he relave order of arhaeologia mnifestaions to e determined These dang tehniques so onstted an ndepenent

test of hronologies at had been erre by means of seaion

alone or were based on mite teua at oen anayss proided

vaable new insigts into prehistori lmai a enviromenta

changes and ae-element anases added an imporant imension

to he study of e prehstor movement of ertain ins of goods

hle ere is onsierble varion n how qily an nsiglly

rhaeologsts apply innovaons erved from e physa and bo

logical senes to heir work one he have been norported itoarchaeologa researh sh novaons ten to sprea rogot

the word rapdly an wh ile resstane The ain ostale to

ther spread s lak of nds a trained senic peronnel 'trstat proably reate more ispi beeen the araeolog of rihan poor nations than ay other et even now when more physa nd biologi research s beng undertaen speay to solve

araeologal problems disoveres i ese elds remain among

e least pretable fators nuening arhaeologa interpretaton

(Nash 2000)

2 3


14/21


15/21


16/21


17/21

A Hsto of cheoogc Thought

of cultue. Positivists mantn at, because of its wholly subjectve nture the hemeneutc mehod does not provde scientcppoach fo e study of beliefs Each of these appoaches is thefomalzaton o f a ay of gning a t pe of knoledge tht is vital forevedy human living Posivism reltes to the sor of knowledgetht is necessar to adapt to the natr world and ideasm to htis eqred o interact with oter human beings

Te ndequcies of both posivism and dealsm s epistemologiesfo socil sciences hve pomoted he poplrit of hird option:realism Bhskar I7; H I70, I72; Har d Mdden I75 ;Bunge 2003) aro Bunge ( I6 355) maintains tat relism isthe epistemolog tat all easonable nd productve scientists ctuay follow whateve epistemolog tey dvocate Re_al jentife object of scienc study as being not only ha ca be_perceivedi e senses o coceptulzed in he ban but all a xsts ndhappens Thus realists pay equl ttenon to ll things whetherthe can obsee them or oy their eects Ideas ae viewed s pro

cesses that occur te human ban ad hence can be studied froa materialst pespectve Realists mantan hat some impercepbleentites are appropriate objects of study Thu s they do not conethemselves to appearnces as positvists do but hey lso do nomale common cause ith idealists in betting the signicance ofappearances Oen tey begin appeances ad tr to explainthem by postulatng unobserable ees as Grego endel ddhen he poposed at what are no cled genes ere necessar toexplin te results of s interbeeding of dierent vaetes of gardenpes Because it ccepts te validi of studying structues s ell sentites realism is ntireductost a result of acnoledgg the

complex of the real world it also rejects te posist equtng ofexplanaton nd pedcon

Genealizaons which can conce boh patens nd te mechanisms tat ccoun t fo pattens play role in all scientic opetionsrelatg to the collecton desciption classiction nd intepetton of dta Achaologists foow the example of philosophes ofscience (Nagel I 6 ) ad ohe social science disciplines i classing te genealizations nto hgh middle and lo ctegoies KejnI 7; ab nd Goodye I 4) (Figure I . I ) Oy mdde- and highlevel genealztons cou as hypoheses o eores ccong to theexten of tei conrmaton because they alone propose mechaisms

Stug the Hsto of chaeolog

Levels ofTheory

H i g h

M d d l e

ow o

1o 0

1 1o 0

1 Arc haeooga Dat a

I lo g ic a t fac t u a + c oh er e n ce c orre s p on de n ce(l e ng t h of a r ow n d cate s e a t iv e im port a n ce of r e a t o n s h p)

Figure 1 . I Relations beeen eves of generaizaion

aaccount for why things ae s tey reand chge s he do in

multple instces .

Low-level generalizatons seek to scove patens in archaeolog

ical data (Klejn 1 97 7 : 2 ) . These ptens appea to be the same s

Enest Nagel's ( I96 1 79-1 5 )expeimenal ls of c he es

s an example te poposion that all femle hales sucle teir

young Such genealizations ae nomally based on regularites

e epeatedly obseed ad can be reted by e obsero of

contra cases The vst mjo of generalizatons on which ger-

level archeological intepretaons are based are eprical ones of

this sor. The include most pological classicatons ofartifacts;

thedelineaon ofspecicarcheologicl cultues the emonsrato

by means of stracaton serion, o adiocarbon datg t one

archaeologcal maifeston dates earlie or lae a aothe and

tIeobseraon thatin an individul cultue humas are bured

3


18/21

A isto o caeologial Toght

a pariula poiion aompanied by pei pe o aria. eeeneraizaion are baed on oberaion a pei aribue orra pe our repeaely in a parular aoiaion wi eaoer orrelae w a pei eorapi loaliy, or dae o a ert period e dmenio o u enerzaion are e laialone o pae me and orm (Spaulin 1960 Gardin 1980 629 Araeoloi alo may ae a pei e o projelepoin ered priular non nd a ea araeoloial ulure wa aoiaed i a pei people ee nerene wireer o umn beavor fer ubanially rom eneralizaon aare baed o emprial oberaon o orrelaion beween o ormore aeorie o araeoloiall anible daa nd do no onue example o low-level enerizaon n my inane ebeavioral aumpon rn ou o be inorre unproved or mleadn (Hodder and Huon 200 15

Beaue o e naure o araeoloal daa low-level enerlizaon never reer o uman beaor ey D revea

orrelaion beween one or o araeoloal oberaon ndnoer u providi edene o iero unnoed paernin ororderi in araeoloil daa ee empirial oberaon neverprovde explnaon bu onue paern a require explaaionioverin eneralizaion o i or i e mo ime-onuinand ruably e mo produve aviy in w araeoloienae Ye fOn a eore perpeve i i e lea uded oaaeoloi avie Mo orial work o i or a beendone b aeoloi nereed in laiaon and eriaon andby loii (Gardn 980 10 Maina and VaIek 1990 149-209

Midde-level eoie ave been deed a eneraaion a

aemp o explain e reularie a our beeen o or morevariable in muliple nane (Raab and Goodyear 984 Su eneralizaon an be produed eier b renn ilevel eorieo a ey re appliable o pei daa e (u a araeoloia daa) or by ee o provde an explanaon or wy erainlow-level eneralizaion our muliple ine l oial ien eneraizaon ould ave roulural vlidi and alo makeome reerene o uma beavior n adon ey m be ien pei a e an be eed by applyin em o paulare o daa eample o a dl e-level anropoloial eneralizaon i Eer Boeup' ( 1 96 5 propoion a amon ariulural

32

tng the O o haeolo

eonomie inreain populaon preure lead o iuaion areire more labor or ea uni o ood produed order o derivemore ood rom ea avable ni o arable land i eor wouldbe raeoloiay eable i aaeoloi oud eab reablemeaure o abolue or relave ane populaon e labornenivene nd produivi o pei ariulral reime nd auieny preie ronolo o pei e empor relaionipbeeen ane populaion nd ood produion oin iwould requre elabora a Lew Binord ( 1 9 8 ll midderane eo wi aemp o ue enorapi daa o eablireliable orrelaon beeen araeoloial obrable penomena and araeoloially unoberable um beavior. Alou"de-level and "middle-rane eorie are no idenal in aiddelevel eor n reer exuively o umn beavior wereaidderane eo mu by denion reer o bo uman beaorand raeoloially oberable rai ll Bord mddle rane eo an be rearded a a peial e o mddle-level eo Midd e

rae eor i vial or en l middle-level eor relan oaraeoloia daaHilevel or eneral eorie wi Harri ( 99 : 26

a aed "reear raeie and avid Clarke ( 99 : 25-0labeled "onrollin model ave been deed a abra rlea explain relaon amon e eoreial propoion a arerelevan or underanin a maor eld o knowlede arinianevoliom and ore reenly e yne eo o bioloialevoluon w ombine ariia priniple wi ene eexample o eneral eorie relai o e bioloial ene ne uman domin eneral eorie eluively relae propoiion

abou uma beavor o one oer; ene ere are no eoreial ormulaion a i level a perin peily o araeoloraer n o e oia iene i eneral i rue even oe orie a relae umn beavior o maeria lture Example o rivilevel eorie a urrenly inuene araeoloial reearare eleonim ulurl eoloy ulra maerialim ad hioria maeriaim (Marim) ee are ll maeri approae ndoverlap o vrin deree. n reen ear ere a been a reene o iere in i -level eorie a aemp o explain umnbeavor in erm o ulu beli or uderlyn lra ruureSu eorie are n idei approa Si oler leorie a

33


19/21

stor o Archaeolocal Thought

n-Mxm bridg t gap btn matrait d idat igv piti raig a brad prum ig -v i iri

Bau ghv tri attmpt to irrat np abutumn bavir rar an t aut r pi bratin tyant b nrmd r aid dirty (M. Harri I979: 76) I tat

rpt ty rmb rgiu dgma ir rii an, wvr b nud by rpat u r aiur middvtri that ar giy dpndnt tm Y u tng iayhig but trigtrward tug my middrag ri may av ignia r itinguig bn matriai adidait md xpatin mpxit a Un bavir ad it ymbiay mdiatd at rat mu pprtntr bati Sia int bi grat ignui i dimig rut ta d n agr wi tir pruppitin a xpn r v rtrpring tm a iky ma wa tybi A ru a grwig appria t r payd

by ida i inuig uman bavir may Marxit av idrm a pury matriai t a mr idit viw uman bavirSmtm ti w piti i ditiguid a Marximmtim it i t (MGui I9 93 ; iggr I 993 ) Likwi i ryar ay ura git av id m a mr dtrmitit a dtrmii pii vrappig natr ig vtri uman bavir prvid nidrab ppruiti ru it gymat i i mr fut r ragit a raiv utiy t vriu matriit pintd abv Brup' midd-v try hav impiai r b uura matriam an ulura g nd n

ud b it u r aig rav uit r tr ur dd-v ri nrm prrrd ig n b dimid a t ru iadqua r napprpiat data rar a aptd atig dubt ig-vprpin

Bau t dir tt th i and in ppuari pi g-v tri m t b iund mr byia pr tan by t in xamiatin gialy ratdmidd- ri Bt I850 nd I945 a tg mpai wa pad bigia and mr piay rai xpa ariati in uma bair Siti dma ta

34

g he iso o Achaeolo

xpanat r i d i pi a wr iadqua udrmi t it at may ar ad i t grvaidit a rai appra (M Harri I968a 80I07 raind r a tim amt al bigiy bad tri wr abadnd a ii xpai man bavir wg tmiiar dat Nazi Grmany i I 945 and t n qut rvat xtnt it rait-ipird arii t ha b brd tat mariit ri td uri in ia i whn mid-a inttua u wraidait ar pud durig p w nmi ad iupava rat urity (Eng [I 868] in Marx ad Eg I 9642638 ) .

rhagit gray apt mty impity tat nixpaai ar ubj t t tp vrati (Ltr 196;K 2001 h rt tt i tat rrpd tut hi ttk t dtr i an xpanai rrpd t t at t i u t uggt tat a ugt aCCOt r ap traizd

pitia tr i a ary iiizati i vidn a drug anb prdud nd i at r trUt wr rt a rgumnt i giay ni vr t ad a miia ratna ppr a vpd gi a a pwr tr dttg aw i xpaati. Fw ragi av didrma gi but y ny divrig ia aw in rrgumnt a a way rtig bt unwm tri ad aadmi riva Opx argumnt ar dd p wi pnmna raing t um bhavir Ptia ap mig rt ma vr amin but ny i a ity ak trd urpu r at atav ur d H maua xpa ar

rary vr adquat in h ia i Mrvr t am may rut rm a umbr dirn au a brakdn irma patr ui g adrp a migt rut inpita ap. i a ituat kwn a quiaity

day it huld b poib abi a gialy rt rap g igh middl ad w v r and a aturrpdn btn mdd- nd w-v gnraiza dbrab vid Bau w-v graizati ar mpriin aur rn tt d t appy t ratin twn tmand vid ra a w av arady d atu rrpnd rry a a dir t t ig -v t r . man

35


20/21


21/21

A sto o aoo ou

The substanvist approach impes that nove properes can and doemere as a resut of socioutur change Cde 1 947a). Tis dsncon beee uiversa eneraizaons d more resricted onesmay not be as arreach or absolute a ts roponets maintanGenerzaons hat appy ony to specic tpes o sociees can bererie e form of univers geeraizaos wereas unver-sa ones ay be reformulated usuy in greater deta, so that eyay secicay to a pcr class of societ Yet those ho essthe importance of resricted geerizations arue at a or most ofthem cannot e tansformed into unversal generaizaons wtouta severe oss i contet ad sigcace Triger 1982a)

Te hd e o fgeeraizato is specic t o n individua cutureor to a sle roup of historcaly related culures Examples woude e eniio of e canos at oerned cient Egpti orclassica Greek art Chide 947: 43-9; Montan 1980: 1306) Sucheneraizatons are poteniy ve important nsmuch as most cu-r atternin is robably of ths srt et, here no culualy

specc meaings ca e appied to such patterns ey remn at eleel of emic gene rzaos

Chalenge

A nl queson is weher a istorica stdy can measure roress ihe interpretaon of acaeologca data Are steady advances enmade toward a more obecve and comprehensive uderstadngof archaeologica ndins, as any archaeogsts assume? Or s thenteretato of such data arely a matter ofshon and e accoishments of a ater peiod not ecessarily more coprehesive or

obece tan ose of a earler one Answering is questio svitl for considering wheher e deelopment of archaeolog doesor does not promote greater obec i ts ndngs.

In eamning the pters that have chaacterzed the interpre-taon of chaeooica data, I shal aempt to ascertai to hatextent archaeoogica tecues as wel as a geera uderstaningof human histor and behavor have been ireversibly atered as aresut of arcaeoogcal activi Tere is eiece of some lneariti he development of archaeolog as, for examle, w e couig relence of e prncipe of saigrahy of equency seriaonad of Ian Hodder's ( 19 82 b deonsaon ha materia cure

Studyg he HisOY of Achaeolo

ca pla an acive a well as a epipeomel ro i soci processes et ere is o edece hat rchaeolosts at any oe periodare less inuenced by subjece beefs ad socia circumstances atey are at ny oher In dion, coent factors ersonate,academc polcies, sheer iornce professio ses ad ndigal uence e accetace ad aplicao of e ideas ad tec-ues (Nash 2000b 208) It s ossile however, at archaeoo

cal interpretao aouh nay hy suece ecoes essuenced by soca bses ad less susceple to poltcl aipuao as e rchaeologic dtabase coms more abUdant, dherefore, at an understag of he past gros ore objecte asore archaeologica research is cried out That tred woud accor e clams of moderate relavists at archaeoloica edences e capaci to lmt speculao aout e past If archaeologicaliterpretaions e wholy, or even largey, subecve we should note ale to dscoer many sgncant loterm patterns ut on r-do vriations rought about y hges i te economc socalnd teectual milieu. I feidence play a role in lming speclaonte developmet of archaeolog soud be increasingly consaiedy owdge tat blogs to te discipe even if sujecte factorscoue to iuence sgcay te wers to what are regrdedat any ven time as teresin question If rchaeoogcal evidencelays a ignicat role in haping an understandig of e past testdy of ontoog n aricar of the factors at constra umbehavor, il ecome as if not mor important an leariaout epistemoo, or te nare of understanding for he uredevelopmet of our dsce That woul reverse a end that hasrevaled snce te 1960s or eve te 90 By learnng more aout

how arcaeologica uesons are answered over ime e may hpeto gn addtional insgts ito e objecivi or sujecii orcaeologica nterretaons; to what etent arcaeolog can emoe tan e past relied i e preset i e sense Cogoddened at process ad te degree to wch ay sot ofunderstad-ig ca e commucated om one age or cure to aoter

9

trigger+ 2006 + +chapter+1+ +studying+history+of+arch

Documents