refined Archaeology Information, explanation, recent texts, monographs, and related patents.

Information & explanations, latest texts & monographs on Archaeology (including recent related patents.)

Archaeology

Archaeology (or archeology) is the study of past and present human cultures through the analysis of material remains, including architecture, artifacts, biofacts, human remains, and landscapes. In the United States, it is considered a branch of anthropology; in Britain, it stands by itself but is more closely aligned with history. Table of contents showTocToggle("show","hide") 1 Importance and applicability 2 Goals 2.1 Academic sub-disciplines 2.2 Cultural resources management 3 History of archaeology 3.1 Origins 3.2 Development of archaeological method 3.3 Introduction of technology 3.4 The development of archaeological theory 3.5 Ideology 3.6 Schools of Theoretical Archaeology 4 Relations with the public 4.1 Pseudoarchaeology 4.2 Looting 4.3 Public outreach 4.4 Descendant peoples 5 Archaeological techniques 6 Regions within Archaeology 7 See also 8 External Links 9 Further Reading Importance and applicability Most of human history is not described by any written records. Writing did not exist anywhere in the world until about 5000 years ago, and only spread among a relatively small number of technologically advanced civilizations. These civilizations are, not coincidentally, the best-known; they have been open to the inquiry of historians for centuries, while archaeology has arisen only recently. Any knowledge of the formative early years of human civilization - the development of agriculture, the rise of the first cities - must come from archaeology. Even where written records do exist, they are often incomplete or biased. In many societies, literacy was restricted to the elite classes, such as the clergy or the aristocracy. These elite classes were generally detached from the lives and interests of the masses. Any 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 be biased, and cannot be trusted as a sole source. The material record, while also biased towards the grander, more durable dwellings of the wealthy, is nearer to a fair representation of society. Archaeological remains sometimes have political 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 political or economic treasures. This view is espoused in works of popular fiction, such as Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Mummy, and King Solomon's Mines. It is also promulgated by some high-profile archaeologists, such as Graham Hancock searching for the Ark of the Covenant and Erich von Däniken (author of "Chariot of the Gods"). This was indeed an accurate description of much archaeology in the 19th century, but the field has changed much since then. These endeavors, real and fictional, are not representative of the modern state of archaeology. Some scholars have branded these endeavors as pseudoarchaeology. Goals There is still a tremendous emphasis in the practice of archaeology on field techniques and methodologies. These include the tasks of surveying areas in order to find new sites, and digging sites in order to unearth the cultural remains therein, and classification and preservation techniques in order to analyze and keep these remains. Information can be derived throughout this process. The goals of archaeology are not always the same. There are at least three broad, distinct theories of exactly what archaeological research should do. (These are beyond the scope of the present discussion, and are discussed at length below.) Nevertheless, there is much common ground. Academic sub-disciplines Archaeology is a much broader field than suggested by these common conceptions. Archaeological research is sometimes categorized according to the time period which it studies. Any study of a society which has also left written documents, and is thus also a subject for historical analysis, is considered historical archaeology. Some civilizations have attracted so much attention that their study has been specifically named. These subdisciplines include Assyriology (the ancient Near East), Classical archaeology (Greece and Rome), and Egyptology (Egypt). Prehistoric archaeology concerns itself with societies that did not have writing systems. (Some find the term 'prehistoric' offensive; 'ancient archaeology' is sometimes used instead.) Between these two branches is protohistoric archaeology, the study of societies with very limited written records. (One example of a protohistoric site is Fort Ross on the northern California coast, which included settlements of literate Russians and non-literate American Indians and Alaska natives.) Ethnoarchaeology is the study of modern societies resembling extinct ones of archaeological interest, for archaeological purposes. It is often difficult to infer conclusions about the structure and values of ancient societies from their material remains, not only because objects are mute and say little about those who crafted and used them, but also because not all objects survive to be uncovered by scholars of a later age. Ethnoarchaeology seeks to determine, for instance, what kinds of objects used in a living settlement are deposited in middens or other places where they may be preserved, and how likely an object is to be discarded near to the place where it was used. Ethnoarchaeology contributes to the study of contemporary societies. Taphonomy is the study of how objects decay and degrade over time. This information is critical to interpretation of artifacts and other objects, so that the work of ancient people can be differentiated from the later work of living creatures and elemental forces. A list of other subdisciplines is given below. Some of these are not areas of study in their own right, and are only approaches to a larger project.

Archaeoastronomy is the interpretation of ancient sites (such as Stonehenge) as temples or monuments of an astronomical nature.
Archaeometry is the application of scientific methods to archaeology.
Computational archaeology is the application of computers, particularly GIS, to archaeology
Industrial archaeology focuses on the preservation of material relics of the Industrial Revolution.
Lithics is the analysis of stone tools, a diverse and abundant type of artifact.
Maritime archaeology is the study of submerged archaeological sites, including shipwrecks as well as settlements that have been engulfed by bodies of water.
Museum studies
Paleoethnobotany is the analysis of plant remains (often pollen, a relatively durable carrier of DNA) recovered from archaeological sites.
Zooarchaeology is the analysis of animal remains.

Cultural resources management Cultural resources management (CRM) is a branch of archaeology that accounts for most reserach done in the United States and much of that in western Europe as well. In the United States, CRM archaeology has been a growing concern since the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and most of the archaeology done in that country today proceeds from either direct or related requirements of that measure. In the United States, the vast majority of taxpayers, scholars, and politicians believe that CRM has helped to 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, this mandates that no construction project on public land or involving public funds may damage an unstudied archaeological site. 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 doubtless mitigated the destruction of the archaeological record by the ever-sprawling works of Western civilization, but it leaves something to be desired. 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 endeavor. History of archaeology Origins The exact origins of archaeology as a discipline are hazy. Excavations of ancient monuments and the collection of antiquities have been going on for at least two thousand years. It was only in the 19th century, however, that the systematic study of the past through its physical remains began to be carried out in a manner recognisable to modern students of archaeology. Prior to this, excavation had tended to be haphazard; the importance of concepts such as stratification and context was completely overlooked. In 1803, there was widespread criticism of Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin for removing the "Elgin Marbles" from their rightful place on the Parthenon in Athens; but the marble sculptures themselves were valued by his critics only for their aesthetic qualities, not for the light they might throw on Greek civilisation. Britain was one of the first countries to develop a systematic approach to archaeology and to recognise it as a discipline in its own right (though the debate over whether it is an "art" or a "science" continues). The first individuals to take a serious interest in the subject were clergymen. Many vicars recorded local landmarks within their parishes, and these might include details of the landscape, as well as ancient monuments such as standing stones -- even where they did not recognise the significance of what they were seeing. It is thanks to them that we know about many archaeological features which have since disappeared or been moved. A major figure in the development of archaeological method was Augustus Pitt Rivers. Archaeology was still an amateur pastime, but Britain's colonial period had provided opportunities for "gentlemen" to study antiquities in many other countries. Pitt-Rivers himself, having caught the bug during his military career, brought many artefacts back from overseas and, having inherited a large estate with numerous prehistoric features, collected more artefacts off his own land. From his personal collection (the nucleus of the museum named after him, in Oxford), he developed a typology, something few had thought of doing but which would be of enormous significance for dating purposes. In France, similar things were happening at around the same time. Napoleon's army carried out excavations during its Egyptian campaign. The emperor had taken with him a force of five hundred civilian scientists, specialists in fields such as biology, chemistry and languages, in order to carry out a full study of the ancient civilisation. The work of Jean-François Champollion in deciphering the Rosetta stone to discover the hidden meaning of hieroglyphics proved the key to the study of Egyptology. These developments were not limited to Europe. In America, Thomas Jefferson, possibly inspired by his experiences in Europe, supervised the excavation of an Indian burial mound on his land in Virginia in 1784. Although Jefferson's investigative methods were ahead of his time (and have earned him the nickname "father of archaeology"), they were primitive by today's standards. He did not simply dig down into the mound in the hope of "finding something"; he cut a wedge out of it in order to examine the stratigraphy. The results did not inspire his contemporaries to do likewise, and they continued to hack away indiscriminately at tell sites in the Middle East, destroying valuable archaeological material in the process. Development of archaeological method The next major figure in the development of archaeology in the UK was Mortimer Wheeler, whose highly disciplined approach to excavation and systematic coverage of much of the country in the 1920s and 1930s brought the science on swiftly. It was not until the introduction of modern technology, from the 1950s onwards that a similar leap forward would be made in field archaeology. Wheeler's method of excavation, laying out the site on a grid pattern, though gradually abandoned in favour of the open-area method, still forms the basis of excavation technique. Meanwhile, the work of Sir Arthur Evans at Knossos in Crete had shed light on the Minoan civilisation. Many of the finds from this site were catalogued and brought to the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, where they could be studied by classicists, whilst an attempt was made to reconstruct much of the original site. Although this was done in a manner that would be considered inappropriate today, it helped raise the profile of archaeology considerably. Archaeology was increasingly becoming a professional activity. Although the bulk of an excavation's workforce would still consist of volunteers, it would normally be led by a professional. It was now possible to study archaeology as a subject in universities and even schools, and by the end of the 20th century nearly all professional archaeologists, at least in developed countries, were graduates. Introduction of technology Undoubtedly the major technological development in 20th century archaeology was the introduction of radiocarbon dating, based on a theory first developed by American scientist Willard Libby in 1949. Despite its many limitations (it can only be used on organic matter), the technique brought about a revolution in archaeological understanding. For the first time, it was possible to put reasonably accurate dates on discoveries such as bones. This in some cases led to a complete reassessment of the significance of past finds. Classic cases included the Red Lady of Paviland. It was not until 1989 that the Catholic church allowed the technique to be used on the Turin Shroud, demonstrating that the linen fibres were of medieval origin. Radiocarbon dating was developed almost in tandem with dendrochronology, another valuable archaeological technique. Dates could be calibrated by reference to the bristlecone pine of California, which can survive in situ for four thousand years or more. These developments led indirectly to other scientific advances. For field archaeologists, the most significant of these was the introduction of the geophysical survey, enabling an advance picture to be built up of what lies beneath the soil, before excavation even commences. The entire Roman city of Wroxeter has been surveyed by these methods, though only a small portion has actually been excavated. The development of archaeological theory There is no single theory of archaeology, and even definitions are disputed. Until the mid-20th century and the introduction of technology, there was a general consensus that archaeology was closely related to both history and anthropology. Since then, elements of other disciplines such as physics, chemistry, biology, metallurgy, engineering, medicine, etc, have found an overlap, resulting in a need to revisit the fundamental ideas behind archaeology. The first major phase in the history of archaeological theory is commonly referred to as cultural history. The aim of cultural history was to group sites into distinct "cultures", to determine the geographic spread and timespan of these cultures, and to reconstruct the interactions and flow of ideas between them. Cultural history, as the name suggests, was closely allied with the science of history. Cultural historians employed the normative model of culture, the principle that each culture is a set of norms governing human behavior. Thus, cultures can be distinguished by patterns of craftsmanship; for instance, if one excavated sherd of pottery is decorated with a triangular pattern, and another sherd with a checkered pattern, they likely belong to different cultures. In the 1960s, a number of young, primarily American archaeologists, such as Lewis Binford, rebelled against the paradigms of cultural history. They proposed a "New Archaeology", which would be more "scientific" and "anthropological". They came to see culture as a set of behavioral processes and traditions. (In time, this view gave rise to the term processual archaeology). Processualists borrowed from the exact sciences the idea of hypothesis testing. They believed that an archaeologist should develop one or more hypotheses about a culture under study, and conduct excavations with the intention of testing these hypotheses against fresh evidence. In the 1980s, a new movement arose. It questioned processualism's appeals to science and impartiality by claiming that every archaeologist is in fact biased by his or her personal experience and background, and thus truly scientific archaeological work is difficult or impossible. Exponents of this so-called post-processual archaeology analyzed not only the material remains they excavated, but also themselves, their attitudes and opinions. The post-processualists also decried the processual model of culture, which (they believed) treated people as mindless automatons and ignored their individuality. The goal of post-processual archaeology, then, is to reconstruct the thoughts and beliefs of past people. This evolution of theory has not progressed identically in all parts of the world where archaeology is conducted. For instance, processualism and post-processualism have not been as influential in Britain as in the United States, and have made even fewer inroads into mainland Europe. Ideology Much of the early history of professional archaeology was motivated by an attempt to distance itself from pseudo-archeologists and dilettantes, and to establish itself as a science. While this battle has been won, archaeology has been and remains a cultural, gender and political battlefield. Many groups have tried to use archaeology to prove some current cultural or political point. Marxist or Marxist-influenced archaeologists in the USSR and the UK (among others) often try to prove the truth of dialectical materialism or to highlight the past (and present) role of conflict between interest groups (e.g. male vs. female, elders vs. juniors, workers vs. owners) in generating social change. Some contemporary cultural groups have tried, with varying degrees of success, to use archaeology to prove their historic right to ownership of an area of land. Many schools of archaeology have been patriarchal, assuming that in prehistory men produced most of the food by hunting, and women produced little nutrition by gathering; more recent studies have exposed the inadequacy of many of these theories. Some used the "Great Ages" theory implicit in the three-age system to argue continuous upwards progress by Western civilization. Much contemporary archaeology is influenced by neo-Darwinian evolutionary thought, phenomenology, post-modernism, agency theory, and cognitive science. Schools of Theoretical Archaeology These include:

Functionalism
Processualism - a systematic approach to culture.
Post-processualism - a relativistic approach to culture.
Cognitive archaeology
Gender/Feminist archaeology

Relations with the public 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, portrayed in books (such as King Solomon's Mines) and films (viz. The Mummy, Raiders of the Lost Ark). Much thorough and productive research has indeed been conducted in dramatic locales such as Copán and the Valley of the Kings, but the stuff of modern archaeology is usually quite mundane. In addition, archaeological adventure stories tend to ignore the painstaking work involved in modern survey, excavation and data processing techniques. Some archaeologists refer to such portrayals as 'pseudoarchaeology'. Pseudoarchaeology Pseudoarchaeology is an umbrella term for all activities that claim to be archaeological but are in fact violations of commonly accepted archaeological practice. It includes much fictional archaeological work (discussed above), as well as some actual activity. Many nonfiction authors have ignored the scientific methods of processual archaeology. (Postprocessualism is a valid branch of archaeology that looks skeptically on claims to scientific impartiality, but it does not conclude that these methods should be entirely dispensed with and forgotten. "Pseudoarchaeology" does not address the issues raised by postprocessualists.) An example, some consider, of this type is the author, Erich von Däniken. His Chariots of the Gods (1968), together with many subsequent, lesser-known works, expounds a theory of ancient contacts between human civilization on Earth and more technologically advanced extraterrestrial civilizations. (This theory, known as palaeocontact theory, is not exclusively Däniken's.) 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. An example of inappropriately labelling an endeavor as this was Heinrich Schliemann, a German archaeologist, research on Troy. He subseguently discovered the location of Troy. His endeavors were widely seen as pseudoarchaeology by his contemporaries, taking Plato's account literally. Looting Looting of buried treasure is an ancient problem; for instance, many of the tombs of the Egyptian pharaohs were looted in antiquity. The advent of archaeology has made ancient sites objects of great scientific interest, but it has also attracted public attention to the works of past peoples. A brisk commercial demand for artifacts has accelerated the pace of looting and the antiquities trade. The popular consciousness may associate looting with Third World countries, former homes to some of the less well-known ancient civilizations and lacking the financial resources to protect even the most fabulous sites. In fact, looting has left a significant mark in places as "civilized" and seemingly uninteresting as the United States. Abandoned towns of the ancient Sinagua people of Arizona, clearly visible in the desert landscape, have been destroyed in large numbers. Sites in more densely populated areas farther east have also been looted. Public outreach Motivated by a desire to halt looting, to curb pseudoarchaeology, and to secure greater public funding for their research, archaeologists are mounting public-outreach campaigns. They seek to stop looting by informing prospective artifact collectors of the provenance of these goods, and by alerting people who live near archaeological sites of the threat of looting and the danger that it poses to science. Common methods of public outreach include press releases and the encouragement of school field trips to sites under excavation. Descendant peoples In the United States, American Indians tend to mistrust archaeology. This mistrust is well-founded. For years, archaeologists have been digging up Indian burial grounds and other places considered sacred, and carting away any artifacts and human remains to storage facilities for further study. Adding insult to injury, many skeletons were not even thoroughly studied. Furthermore, Western archaeologists' views of the past are different from those of tribal peoples. The West views time as linear; for 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. To an archaeologist, the past is long-gone and must be reconstructed; to a native, it is yet alive. As a consequence of this misunderstanding, American Indians have often attempted to prevent archaeological excavation of sites inhabited by their ancestors, while archaeologists have paid them little heed. This situation is beginning to change. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA, 1990), limits 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 native peoples likely to be descended from those under 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 has also been an active effort to recruit Native Americans directly into the archaeological profession. Archaeological techniques

Regions within Archaeology