Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:52:36 +0200 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
isn't it ultimately all a reflection of the fact that no one really thought
archaeology through very carefully? the histories keep talking about the
role "uniformitarianism" played, but then british archaeology especially
jumped onto the prehistoric bandwagon without seriously considering what
that means: "the present is the key to the past" implies first off knowledge
about the present: ethnographic analogy, experimental archaeology, site
formation processes, etc.; then going "from the known to the unknown" should
have put more stress on historical archaeology, then start making bigger
jumps to "classical antiquity" then prehistoric, but...
lord avebury & the boys, when they wrote up the relevant legislation, tried
to ignore medieval remains in part because of some popular, egalitarian
associations which seemed to threaten the social hierarchy...
is there maybe a list on the history of archaeology?
|
|
|