HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
[log in to unmask], HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask], 'Die deutschsprachige Mailingliste zur Archäologie' <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 26 May 2015 16:03:06 +0200
Reply-To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
<007801d097bc$b0b3bec0$121b3c40$@de>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From:
geoff carver <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (9 lines)
When discussing the work of David Clarke, this is part of the explanation
Andrew Sherrat offered for the reaction against processualism:
"Even as taught in many universities, it has had a strongly
anti-intellectual streak, emphasizing expertise in excavation and
typological finesse at the expense of sustained inquiry into the development
of human culture and society."
Is this still true? Is there still "a strongly anti-intellectual streak" in
archaeology?

ATOM RSS1 RSS2