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]>
Subject:
From:
Iain Stuart <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:45:37 +1000
Reply-To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
Mail*Link(r) SMTP               Ethnicity-a reply
 
This has been a very interesting thread.
 
One difficulty is that we are so familar with the material culture we excavate
that it is difficult to remember that it may not have the meanings we assume
it does. This is particularlly true for 19th and 20th century sites.
 
As an antidote I suggest some living archaeology in our own context to look at
the diversity of meanings ascribed to material culture.
 
I have no really good ideas for a methdology to overcome this in the field
however the use of the historical record as a way of building contexts (a form
of Thick Description) seems to be one way to go.
 
Rather than cite Binford and Bordes I think Henry Glassie's approach to
material culture is worth revisiting. "Folk housing in Middle Virginia" is a
very interesting book for both what it says about the houses and the
analytical approach.
 
A former out of touch bureaucrat
University of Sydney

ATOM RSS1 RSS2