Archaeologists study humanprehistory and history, from the development of the firststone tools atLomekwi in East Africa 3.3 million years ago up until recent decades.[5] Archaeology is distinct frompalaeontology, which is the study offossil remains. Archaeology is particularly important for learning about prehistoric societies, for which, by definition, there are no written records. Prehistory includes over 99% of the human past, from thePaleolithic until the advent of literacy in societies around the world.[1] Archaeology has various goals, which range from understandingculture history to reconstructing pastlifeways to documenting and explaining changes in human societies through time.[6] Derived from Greek, the termarchaeology means "the study of ancient history".[7]
Archaeology developed out ofantiquarianism in Europe during the 19th century, and has since become a discipline practiced around the world. Archaeology has been used by nation-states to create particular visions of the past.[8][9] Since its early development, various specific sub-disciplines of archaeology have developed, includingmaritime archaeology,feminist archaeology, andarchaeoastronomy, and numerous different scientific techniques have been developed to aid archaeological investigation. Nonetheless, today, archaeologists face many problems, such as dealing withpseudoarchaeology, thelooting of artifacts,[10][11] a lack of public interest, and opposition to the excavation of human remains.
InAncient Mesopotamia, a foundation deposit of theAkkadian Empire rulerNaram-Sin (ruledc. 2200 BC) was discovered and analysed by kingNabonidus,c. 550 BC, who is thus known as the first archaeologist.[12][13][14] Not only did he lead the first excavations which were to find the foundation deposits of the temples ofŠamaš the sun god, the warrior goddessAnunitu (both located inSippar), and the sanctuary that Naram-Sin built to the moon god, located inHarran, but he also had them restored to their former glory.[12] He was also the first to date an archaeological artifact in his attempt to date Naram-Sin's temple during his search for it.[15] Even though his estimate was inaccurate by about 1,500 years, it was still a very good one considering the lack of accurate dating technology at the time.[12][15][13]
The science of archaeology (fromGreekἀρχαιολογίαarchaiologia, fromἀρχαῖοςarkhaios 'ancient' and-λογία,-logia 'study')[16] grew out of the older multi-disciplinary study known asantiquarianism. Antiquarians studied history with particular attention to ancient artifacts and manuscripts, as well as historical sites. Antiquarianism focused on the empirical evidence that existed for the understanding of the past, encapsulated in the motto of the 18th century antiquary,Richard Colt Hoare: "We speak from facts, not theory". Tentative steps towards the systematization of archaeology as ascience took place during theEnlightenment period in Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries.[17]
InImperial China during theSong dynasty (960–1279), figures such asOuyang Xiu[18] andZhao Mingcheng established the tradition of Chineseepigraphy by investigating, preserving, and analyzing ancientChinese bronze inscriptions from theShang andZhou periods.[19][20](p74)[21](p95) Inhis book published in 1088,Shen Kuo criticized contemporary Chinese scholars for attributing ancient bronze vessels as creations of famous sages rather than artisan commoners, and for attempting to revive them for ritual use without discerning their original functionality and purpose of manufacture.[22] Such antiquarian pursuits waned after the Song period, were revived in the 17th century during theQing dynasty, but were always considered a branch ofChinese historiography rather than a separate discipline of archaeology.[20](pp74–76)[21](p97)
Cyriacus of Ancona was a restlessly itinerant Italianhumanist andantiquarian who came from a prominent family of merchants inAncona, amaritime republic on theAdriatic. He was called by his contemporariespater antiquitatis ('father of antiquity') and today "father of classical archaeology":"Cyriac of Ancona was the most enterprising and prolific recorder of Greek and Roman antiquities, particularly inscriptions, in the fifteenth century, and the general accuracy of his records entitles him to be called the founding father of modern classical archeology."[23] He travelled throughout Greece and all around the Eastern Mediterranean, to record his findings on ancient buildings, statues and inscriptions, including archaeological remains still unknown to his time: theParthenon,Delphi, theEgyptian pyramids, thehieroglyphics.[24] He noted down his archaeological discoveries in his diary,Commentaria (in six volumes).
Flavio Biondo, an Italian Renaissance humanist historian, created a systematic guide to the ruins andtopography of ancient Rome in the early 15th century, for which he has been called an early founder of archaeology.[25]
Antiquarians of the 16th century, includingJohn Leland andWilliam Camden, conducted surveys of the English countryside, drawing, describing and interpreting the monuments that they encountered.[26][27]
TheOxford English Dictionary first cites "archaeologist" from 1824; this soon took over as the usual term for one major branch of antiquarian activity. "Archaeology", from 1607 onward, initially meant what we would call "ancient history" generally, with the narrower modern sense first seen in 1837. However, it wasJacob Spon who, in 1685, offered one of the earliest definitions of"archaeologia" to describe the study of antiquities in which he was engaged, in the preface of a collection oftranscriptions of Roman inscriptions which he had gleaned over the years of his travels, entitledMiscellanea eruditae antiquitatis.
Twelfth-century Indian scholarKalhana's writings involved recording of local traditions, examining manuscripts, inscriptions, coins and architectures, which is described as one of the earliest traces of archaeology. One of his notable work is calledRajatarangini which was completedc. 1150 and is described as one of the first history books of India.[28][29][30]
One of the first sites to undergo archaeological excavation wasStonehenge and othermegalithic monuments in England.John Aubrey (1626–1697) was a pioneer archaeologist who recorded numerousmegalithic and otherfield monuments in southern England. He was also ahead of his time in the analysis of his findings. He attempted to chart the chronological stylistic evolution of handwriting, medieval architecture, costume, and shield-shapes.[31]
Excavations were also carried out by the Spanish military engineerRoque Joaquín de Alcubierre in the ancient towns ofPompeii andHerculaneum, both of which had been covered by ash during theEruption of Mount Vesuvius in AD 79. These excavations began in 1748 in Pompeii, while in Herculaneum they began in 1738. The discovery of entire towns, complete with utensils and even human shapes, as well the unearthing offrescos, had a big impact throughout Europe.
However, prior to the development of modern techniques, excavations tended to be haphazard; the importance of concepts such asstratification andcontext were overlooked.[32]
In the mid-18th century, the GermanJohann Joachim Winckelmann lived in Rome and devoted himself to the study of Roman antiquities, gradually acquiring an unrivalled knowledge of ancient art.[33] Then, he visited the archaeological excavations being conducted atPompeii andHerculaneum.[34] He was one of the founders of scientific archaeology and first applied the categories of style on a large, systematic basis to thehistory of art[35] He was one of the first to separate Greek art into periods and time classifications.[36] Winckelmann has been called both "The prophet and founding hero ofmodern archaeology"[37] and the father of the discipline ofart history.[38]
The father of archaeological excavation wasWilliam Cunnington (1754–1810). He undertook excavations inWiltshire from around 1798,[39] funded by Sir Richard Colt Hoare. Cunnington made meticulous recordings ofNeolithic andBronze Agebarrows, and the terms he used to categorize and describe them are still used by archaeologists today.[40] FutureU.S. PresidentThomas Jefferson also did his own excavations in 1784 using thetrench method, on severalNative American burial mounds inVirginia. His excavations were prompted by the"Moundbuilders" question; however, his careful methods led him to admit he saw no reason why ancestors of the Native Americans of his time could not have raised those mounds.[41]
One of the major achievements of 19th-century archaeology was the development ofstratigraphy. The idea of overlapping strata tracing back to successive periods was borrowed from the newgeological andpalaeontological work of scholars likeWilliam Smith,James Hutton andCharles Lyell. The systematic application of stratigraphy to archaeology first took place with the excavations ofprehistorical andBronze Age sites. In the third and fourth decades of the 19th century, archaeologists likeJacques Boucher de Perthes andChristian Jürgensen Thomsen began to put the artifacts they had found in chronological order.
This photo is made of a single goat hair from a textile found on the 14th century ship in Tallinn, Estonia. Photo was done in archaeology department (University of Tartu) by microscope Olympus BX51, magnification 200x
A major figure in the development of archaeology into a rigorous science was army officer andethnologistAugustus Pitt Rivers,[42] who began excavations on his land in England in the 1880s. Highly methodical by the standards of the time, he is widely regarded as the first scientific archaeologist. Hearranged his artifacts by type or "Typology (archaeology)", and within types chronologically. This style of arrangement, designed to highlight the evolutionary trends in human artifacts, was of enormous significance for the accurate dating of the objects. His most important methodological innovation was his insistence thatall artifacts, not just beautiful or unique ones, be collected and catalogued.[43]
Archaeological excavation of a Stone Age settlement at Glamilders in Långbergsöda village,Saltvik,Åland, in 1906.
William Flinders Petrie is another man who may legitimately be called the Father of Archaeology. His painstaking recording and study of artifacts, both in Egypt and later inPalestine, laid down many of the ideas behind modern archaeological recording; he remarked that "I believe the true line of research lies in the noting and comparison of the smallest details." Petrie developed thesystem of dating layers based on pottery and ceramic findings, which revolutionized the chronological basis ofEgyptology. Petrie was the first to scientifically investigate theGreat Pyramid in Egypt during the 1880s.[44] He was also responsible for mentoring and training a whole generation of Egyptologists, includingHoward Carter who went on to achieve fame with the discovery of the tomb of 14th-century BC pharaohTutankhamun.
The next major figure in the development of archaeology was SirMortimer Wheeler, whose highly disciplined approach to excavation and systematic coverage in the 1920s and 1930s brought the science on swiftly. Wheeler developed thegrid system of excavation,[47] which was further improved by his studentKathleen Kenyon.
Archaeology became a professional activity in the first half of the 20th century, and it became possible to study archaeology as a subject in universities and even schools. By the end of the 20th century nearly all professional archaeologists, at least in developed countries, were graduates. Further adaptation and innovation in archaeology continued in this period, whenmaritime archaeology andurban archaeology became more prevalent andrescue archaeology was developed as a result of increasing commercial development.[48]
The purpose of archaeology is to learn more about past societies and the development of thehuman race. Over 99% of the development of humanity has occurred within prehistoric cultures, who did not make use ofwriting, thereby no written records exist for study purposes. Without such written sources, the only way to understand prehistoric societies is through archaeology. Because archaeology is the study of past human activity, it stretches back to about 2.5 million years ago when the first stone tools are found –The Oldowan Industry. Many important developments in human history occurred during prehistory, such as theevolution of humanity during thePaleolithic period, when thehominins developed from theaustralopithecines inAfrica and eventually into modernHomo sapiens. Archaeology also sheds light on many of humanity's technological advances, for instance the ability to use fire, the development ofstone tools, the discovery ofmetallurgy, the beginnings ofreligion and the creation ofagriculture. Without archaeology, little or nothing would be known about the use of material culture by humanity that pre-dates writing.[49]
However, it is not only prehistoric, pre-literate cultures that can be studied using archaeology but historic, literate cultures as well, through the sub-discipline ofhistorical archaeology. For many literate cultures, such asAncient Greece andMesopotamia, their surviving records are often incomplete and biased to some extent. In many societies, literacy was restricted to theelite classes, such as theclergy, or thebureaucracy of court or temple. The literacy ofaristocrats has sometimes been restricted to deeds and contracts. The interests and world-view of elites are often quite different from the lives and interests of the populace. Writings that were produced by people more representative of the general population were unlikely to find their way intolibraries and be preserved there for posterity. Thus, written records tend to reflect the biases, assumptions, cultural values and possibly deceptions of a limited range of individuals, usually a small fraction of the larger population. Hence, written records cannot be trusted as a sole source. The material record may be closer to a fair representation of society, though it is subject to its own biases, such assampling bias and differential preservation.[50]
Often, archaeology provides the only means to learn of the existence and behaviors of people of the past. Across the millennia many thousands of cultures and societies and billions of people have come and gone of which there is little or no written record or existing records are misrepresentative or incomplete. Writing as it is known today did not exist in human civilization until the 4th millennium BC, in a relatively small number of technologically advanced civilizations. In contrast,Homo sapiens has existed for at least 200,000 years, and other species ofHomo for millions of years (seeHuman evolution). These civilizations are, not coincidentally, the best-known; they are open to the inquiry of historians for centuries, while the study of pre-historic cultures has arisen only recently. Within a literate civilization many events and important human practices may not be officially recorded. Any knowledge of the early years of human civilization – the development of agriculture, cult practices of folk religion, the rise of the first cities – must come from archaeology.
In addition to their scientific importance, archaeological remains sometimes have political or cultural significance to descendants of the people who produced them, monetary value to collectors, or strong aesthetic appeal. Many people identify archaeology with the recovery of such aesthetic, religious, political, or economic treasures rather than with the reconstruction of past societies.
This view is often espoused in works of popular fiction, such as Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Mummy, and King Solomon's Mines. When unrealistic subjects are treated more seriously, accusations of pseudoscience are invariably levelled at their proponents(seePseudoarchaeology). However, these endeavours, real and fictional, are not representative of modern archaeology.
There is no one approach to archaeological theory that has been adhered to by all archaeologists. When archaeology developed in the late 19th century, the first approach to archaeological theory to be practised was that ofcultural-historical archaeology, which held the goal of explaining why cultures changed and adapted rather than just highlighting the fact that they did, therefore emphasizinghistorical particularism.[51] In the early 20th century, many archaeologists who studied past societies with direct continuing links to existing ones (such as those ofNative Americans,Siberians,Mesoamericans etc.) followed thedirect historical approach, compared the continuity between the past and contemporary ethnic and cultural groups.[51] In the 1960s, an archaeological movement largely led by American archaeologists likeLewis Binford andKent Flannery arose that rebelled against the established cultural-history archaeology.[52][53] They proposed a "New Archaeology", which would be more "scientific" and "anthropological", withhypothesis testing and thescientific method very important parts of what became known asprocessual archaeology.[51]
Video showing the different works in an archaeological recovery and analysis
An archaeological investigation usually involves several distinct phases, each of which employs its own variety of methods. Before any practical work can begin, however, a clear objective as to what the archaeologists are looking to achieve must be agreed upon. This done, a site issurveyed to find out as much as possible about it and the surrounding area. Second, an excavation may take place to uncover any archaeological features buried under the ground. And, third, the information collected during the excavation is studied and evaluated in an attempt to achieve the original research objectives of the archaeologists. It is then considered good practice for the information to be published so that it is available to other archaeologists and historians, although this is sometimes neglected.[30]
Before actually starting to dig in a location,remote sensing can be used to look where sites are located within a large area or provide more information about sites or regions. There are two types of remote sensing instruments—passive and active. Passive instruments detect natural energy that is reflected or emitted from the observed scene. Passive instruments sense only radiation emitted by the object being viewed or reflected by the object from a source other than the instrument. Active instruments emit energy and record what is reflected.Satellite imagery is an example of passive remote sensing. Here are two active remote sensing instruments:
Lidar:Lidar (light detection and ranging) uses a laser (light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation) to transmit a light pulse and a receiver with sensitive detectors to measure the backscattered or reflected light. Distance to the object is determined by recording the time between the transmitted and backscattered pulses and using the speed of light to calculate the distance travelled. Lidars can determine atmospheric profiles of aerosols, clouds, and other constituents of the atmosphere.
Laser altimeter: A laser altimeter uses a lidar (see above) to measure the height of the instrument platform above the surface. By independently knowing the height of the platform with respect to the mean Earth's surface, the topography of the underlying surface can be determined.[69]
Drones: Archaeologists around the world usedrones to speed up survey work and protect sites from squatters, builders and miners. In Peru, small drones helped researchers produce three-dimensional models of Peruvian sites instead of the usual flat maps – and in days and weeks instead of months and years.[70] Drones costing as little as £650 have proven useful. In 2013, drones have flown over at least six Peruvian archaeological sites, including the colonial Andean town Machu Llacta 4,000 metres (13,000 ft) above sea level. The drones continue to have altitude problems in the Andes, leading to plans to make a droneblimp, employing open source software.[70] Jeffrey Quilter, an archaeologist with Harvard University said, "You can go up three metres and photograph a room, 300 metres and photograph a site, or you can go up 3,000 metres and photograph the entire valley."[70] In September 2014 drones weighing about 5 kg (11 lb) were used for 3D mapping of the above-ground ruins of the Greek city ofAphrodisias. The data are being analysed by the Austrian Archaeological Institute in Vienna.[71]
Satellite image ofMesopotamia (with the Persian Gulf in the lower right corner) indicating the areas that have been subjected to regional surveys (in blue) over the past decades
The archaeological project then continues (or alternatively, begins) with a field survey. Regional survey is the attempt to systematically locate previously unknown sites in a region. Site survey is the attempt to systematically locate features of interest, such as houses andmiddens, within a site. Each of these two goals may be accomplished with largely the same methods.
Survey was not widely practised in the early days of archaeology. Cultural historians and prior researchers were usually content with discovering the locations of monumental sites from the local populace, and excavating only the plainly visiblefeatures there.Gordon Willey pioneered the technique of regional settlement pattern survey in 1949 in theViru Valley of coastalPeru,[72][73] and survey of all levels became prominent with the rise of processual archaeology some years later.[74]
Survey work has many benefits if performed as a preliminary exercise to, or even in place of, excavation. It requires relatively little time and expense, because it does not require processing large volumes of soil to search out artifacts. (Nevertheless, surveying a large region or site can be expensive, so archaeologists often employsampling methods.)[75] As with other forms of non-destructive archaeology, survey avoids ethical issues (of particular concern to descendant peoples) associated with destroying a site through excavation. It is the only way to gather some forms of information, such assettlement patterns and settlement structure. Survey data are commonly assembled intomaps, which may show surface features and/or artifact distribution.
Archaeologists surveying a site in theHarrat al-Sham, eastern Jordan
The simplest survey technique is surface survey. It involves combing an area, usually on foot but sometimes with the use of mechanized transport, to search for features or artifacts visible on the surface. Surface survey cannot detect sites or features that are completely buried under earth, or overgrown with vegetation. Surface survey may also include mini-excavation techniques such asaugers, corers, andshovel test pits. If no materials are found, the area surveyed is deemedsterile.
Inverted kite aerial photo of an excavation of a Roman building at Nesley near Tetbury in Gloucestershire.
Aerial survey is conducted usingcameras attached toairplanes,balloons,UAVs, or evenKites.[76] A bird's-eye view is useful for quick mapping of large or complex sites. Aerial photographs are used to document the status of the archaeological dig. Aerial imaging can also detect many things not visible from the surface.Plants growing above a buried human-made structure, such as a stone wall, will develop more slowly, while those above other types of features (such asmiddens) may develop more rapidly. Photographs of ripeninggrain, which changes colour rapidly at maturation, have revealed buried structures with great precision. Aerial photographs taken at different times of day will help show the outlines of structures by changes in shadows. Aerial survey also employsultraviolet,infrared,ground-penetrating radar wavelengths,Lidar andthermography.[77]
Geophysical survey can be the most effective way to see beneath the ground.Magnetometers detect minute deviations in theEarth's magnetic field caused byiron artifacts,kilns, some types ofstone structures, and even ditches and middens. Devices that measure theelectrical resistivity of the soil are also widely used. Archaeological features whose electrical resistivity contrasts with that of surrounding soils can be detected and mapped. Some archaeological features (such as those composed of stone or brick) have higher resistivity than typical soils, while others (such as organic deposits or unfired clay) tend to have lower resistivity.
Although some archaeologists consider the use ofmetal detectors to be tantamount to treasure hunting, others deem them an effective tool in archaeological surveying.[78] Examples of formal archaeological use of metal detectors include musketball distribution analysis onEnglish Civil War battlefields, metal distribution analysis prior to excavation of a 19th-century ship wreck, and service cable location during evaluation. Metal detectorists have also contributed to archaeology where they have made detailed records of their results and refrained from raising artifacts from their archaeological context. In the UK, metal detectorists have been solicited for involvement in thePortable Antiquities Scheme.
Archaeological excavation existed even when the field was still the domain of amateurs, and it remains the source of the majority of data recovered in most field projects. It can reveal several types of information usually not accessible to survey, such asstratigraphy, three-dimensional structure, and verifiably primary context.
Modern excavation techniques require that the precise locations of objects and features, known as theirprovenance or provenience, be recorded. This always involves determining their horizontal locations, and sometimes vertical position as well (also seePrimary Laws of Archaeology). Likewise, theirassociation, orrelationship with nearby objects andfeatures, needs to be recorded for later analysis. This allows the archaeologist to deduce whichartifacts and features were likely used together and which may be from differentphases of activity. For example, excavation of a site reveals its stratigraphy; if a site was occupied by a succession of distinct cultures, artifacts from more recent cultures will lie above those from more ancient cultures.
Excavation is the most expensive phase of archaeological research, in relative terms. Also, as a destructive process, it carriesethical concerns. As a result, very few sites are excavated in their entirety. Again the percentage of a site excavated depends greatly on the country and "method statement" issued.Sampling is even more important in excavation than in survey. Sometimes large mechanical equipment, such asbackhoes (JCBs), is used in excavation, especially to remove thetopsoil (overburden), though this method is increasingly used with great caution. Following this rather dramatic step, the exposed area is usually hand-cleaned withtrowels orhoes to ensure that all features are apparent.
Archaeological excavations in the Middle Paleolithic cave site of the Ghamari Cave,Zagros 2025
The next task is to form asite plan and then use it to help decide the method of excavation. Features dug into thenatural subsoil are normally excavated in portions to produce a visiblearchaeological section for recording. A feature, for example a pit or a ditch, consists of two parts: thecut and thefill. The cut describes the edge of the feature, where the feature meets the natural soil. It is the feature's boundary. The fill is what the feature is filled with, and will often appear quite distinct from the natural soil. The cut and fill are given consecutive numbers for recording purposes. Scaled plans and sections of individual features are all drawn on site, black and white and colour photographs of them are taken, andrecording sheets are filled in describing thecontext of each. All this information serves as a permanent record of the now-destroyed archaeology and is used in describing and interpreting the site.
Once artifacts and structures have been excavated, or collected from surface surveys, it is necessary to properly study them. This process is known aspost-excavation analysis, and is usually the most time-consuming part of an archaeological investigation. It is not uncommon for final excavation reports for major sites to take years to be published.
At a basic level of analysis, artifacts found are cleaned, catalogued and compared to published collections. This comparison process often involves classifying themtypologically and identifying other sites with similar artifact assemblages. However, a much more comprehensive range of analytical techniques are available througharchaeological science, meaning that artifacts can be dated and their compositions examined. Bones, plants, and pollen collected from a site can all be analysing using the methods ofzooarchaeology,paleoethnobotany,palynology andstable isotopes[80] while any texts can usually bedeciphered.
These techniques frequently provide information that would not otherwise be known, and therefore they contribute greatly to the understanding of a site.
Historical archaeology is the study of cultures with some form of writing and deals with objects and issues from the past.
Inmedieval Europe, archaeologists have explored the illicit burial of unbaptized children in medieval texts and cemeteries.[82] In downtownNew York City, archaeologists have exhumed the 18th century remains of theAfrican Burial Ground. When remnants of theWWIISiegfried Line were being destroyed, emergency archaeological digs took place whenever any part of the line was removed, to further scientific knowledge and reveal details of the line's construction.
Ethnoarchaeology is the ethnographic study of living people, designed to aid in our interpretation of the archaeological record.[83][84][85][86][87][88] The approach first gained prominence during the processual movement of the 1960s, and continues to be a vibrant component of post-processual and other current archaeological approaches.[68][89][90][91][92] Early ethnoarchaeological research focused onhunter-gatherer or foraging societies; today ethnoarchaeological research encompasses a much wider range of human behaviour.
Experimental archaeology represents the application of the experimental method to develop more highly controlled observations of processes that create and impact the archaeological record.[93][94][95][96][97] In the context of the logical positivism of processualism with its goals of improving the scientific rigor of archaeologicalepistemologies, the experimental method gained importance. Experimental techniques remain a crucial component to improving the inferential frameworks for interpreting the archaeological record.
Archaeometry aims to systematize archaeological measurement. It emphasizes the application of analytical techniques from physics, chemistry, and engineering. It is a field of research that frequently focuses on the definition of the chemical composition of archaeological remains for source analysis.[98] Archaeometry also investigates different spatial characteristics of features, employing methods such as space syntax techniques andgeodesy as well as computer-based tools such asgeographic information system technology.[99]Rare earth elements patterns may also be used.[100] A relatively nascent subfield is that of archaeological materials, designed to enhance understanding of prehistoric and non-industrial culture through scientific analysis of the structure and properties of materials associated with human activity.[101]
Examples of digital archaeology include the use ofcomputer graphics to create virtual3D models of sites, like the throne room of an Assyrian palace or ancient Rome.[102]Photogrammetry and digitaltopographical models are combined withastronomical calculations to check if structures, such as pillars, align with astronomical events like the sun's position at asolstice.[102]Agent-based modelling andsimulation are used to understand past social dynamics and outcomes.Data mining is applied to large collections of archaeological 'grey literature'.
Archaeology can be a subsidiary activity withinCultural resources management (CRM), also calledCultural heritage management (CHM) in the United Kingdom.[103] CRM archaeologists frequently examine archaeological sites that are threatened by development. Today, CRM accounts for most of the archaeological research done in the United States and much of that inwestern Europe as well. In the US, CRM archaeology has been a growing concern since the passage of theNational Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, and most taxpayers, scholars, and politicians believe that CRM has helped 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, the NHPA mandates that projects on federal land or involving federal funds or permits consider the effects of the project on eacharchaeological site.
The application of CRM in the United Kingdom is not limited to government-funded projects. Since 1990,PPG 16[104] has required planners to consider archaeology as amaterial consideration in determining applications for new development. As a result, numerous archaeological organizations undertake mitigation work in advance of (or during) construction work in archaeologically sensitive areas, at thedeveloper's expense. Some of the largest archaeological projects ever undertaken in the UK are due to major infrastructure projects likeA14 road improvement scheme or the building ofHS2.[105][106]
In France, theInstitut national du patrimoine (The National Institute of Cultural Heritage) trains curators specialized in archaeology. Their mission is to enhance the objects discovered. Thecurator is the link between scientific knowledge, administrative regulations, heritage objects and the public.
Among the goals of CRM are the identification, preservation, and maintenance ofcultural 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 excavations indicate the presence of an extraordinarily valuable site, the construction may be prohibited entirely.
Cultural resources management has, however, been criticized. 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 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 endeavour. Compounding the time pressure is the vetting process of site reports that are required (in the US) to be submitted by CRM firms to the appropriateState Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). From the SHPO's perspective there is to be no difference between a report submitted by a CRM firm operating under a deadline, and a multi-year academic project. The result is that for a Cultural Resource Management archaeologist to be successful, they must be able to produce academic quality documents at a corporate world pace.
The annual ratio of open academic archaeology positions (inclusive ofpost-doc, temporary, and non-tenure track appointments) to the annual number of archaeology MA/MSc and PhD students is disproportionate. Cultural Resource Management, once considered an intellectual backwater for individuals with "strong backs and weak minds",[112] has attracted these graduates, and CRM offices are thus increasingly staffed by advance degreed individuals with a track record of producing scholarly articles but who also have extensive CRM field experience.
The protection of archaeological finds for the public from catastrophes, wars and armed conflicts is increasingly being implemented internationally. This happens on the one hand through international agreements and on the other hand through organizations that monitor or enforce protection.United Nations,UNESCO andBlue Shield International deal with the protection of cultural heritage and thus also archaeological sites. This also applies to the integration ofUnited Nations peacekeeping. Blue Shield International has undertaken various fact-finding missions in recent years to protect archaeological sites during the wars in Libya, Syria, Egypt and Lebanon. The importance of archaeological finds for identity, tourism and sustainable economic growth is repeatedly emphasized internationally.[113][114][115][116][117][118]
The president of Blue Shield International,Karl von Habsburg, said during a cultural property protection mission in Lebanon in April 2019 with the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon: "Cultural assets are part of the identity of the people who live in a certain place. If you destroy their culture, you also destroy their identity. Many people are uprooted, often have no prospects anymore and subsequently flee from their homeland."[119]
Extensive excavations atBeit She'an,IsraelPermanent exhibition in a Germanmulti-storey car park, explaining the archaeological discoveries made during the construction of this building
Early archaeology was largely an attempt to uncover spectacular artifacts and features, or to explore vast and mysterious abandoned cities and was mostly done by upper class, scholarly men. This general tendency laid the foundation for the modern popular view of archaeology and archaeologists. Many of the public view archaeology as something only available to a narrow demographic. The job of archaeologist is depicted as a "romantic adventurist occupation",[120] and as a hobby more than a job in the scientific community. Cinema audiences form a notion of "who archaeologists are, why they do what they do, and how relationships to the past are constituted",[120] and is often under the impression that all archaeology takes place in a distant and foreign land, only to collect monetarily or spiritually priceless artifacts. The modern depiction of archaeology has incorrectly formed the public's perception of what archaeology is.
Much thorough and productive research has indeed been conducted in dramatic locales such asCopán and theValley of the Kings, but the bulk of activities and finds of modern archaeology are not so sensational. Archaeological adventure stories tend to ignore the painstaking work involved in carrying out modern surveys,excavations, and data processing. Some archaeologists refer to such off-the-mark portrayals as "pseudoarchaeology".[121]Archaeologists are also very much reliant on public support; the question of for whom they are working is often discussed.[122]
Motivated by a desire to halt looting, curb pseudoarchaeology, and to help preserve archaeological sites through education and fostering public appreciation for the importance of archaeological heritage, archaeologists are mounting public-outreach campaigns.[123] They seek to stop looting by combatting people who illegally take artifacts from protected sites, and by alerting people who live near archaeological sites of the threat of looting. Common methods of public outreach include press releases, the encouragement of school field trips to sites under excavation by professional archaeologists, and making reports and publications accessible outside of academia.[124][125] Public appreciation of the significance of archaeology and archaeological sites often leads to improved protection from encroaching development or other threats.
One audience for archaeologists' work is the public. Archaeologists increasingly realize that their work can benefit non-academic and non-archaeological audiences, and that they have a responsibility to educate and inform the public about archaeology. Local heritage awareness is aimed at increasing civic and individual pride through projects such as community excavation projects, and better public presentations of archaeological sites and knowledge.[citation needed] The U.S. Deptartment of Agriculture,Forest Service (USFS) operates a volunteer archaeology and historic preservation program called the Passport in Time (PIT). Volunteers work with professional USFS archaeologists and historians on national forests throughout the U.S. Volunteers are involved in all aspects of professional archaeology under expert supervision.[126]
Television programs, web videos and social media can also bring an understanding of underwater archaeology to a broad audience. TheMardi Gras Shipwreck Project[127] integrated a one-hour HD documentary,[128] short videos for public viewing and video updates during the expedition as part of the educational outreach. Webcasting is also another tool for educational outreach. For one week in 2000 and 2001, liveunderwater video of theQueen Anne's Revenge Shipwreck Project waswebcast to theInternet as a part of theQAR DiveLive[129] educational program that reached thousands of children around the world.Southerly, C.; Gillman-Bryan, J. (19 February 2009).Diving on the Queen Anne's Revenge. The American Academy of Underwater Sciences. Archived fromthe original on 19 February 2009. Created and co-produced byNautilus Productions and Marine Grafics, this project enabled students to talk to scientists and learn about methods and technologies used by the underwater archaeology team.[130][131]
In the UK, popular archaeology programs such asTime Team andMeet the Ancestors have resulted in a huge upsurge in public interest.[citation needed] Where possible, archaeologists now make more provisions for public involvement and outreach in larger projects than they once did,[132] and many local archaeological organizations operate within theCommunity archaeology framework[133] to expand public involvement in smaller-scale, more local projects. Archaeological excavation, however, is best undertaken by well-trained staff that can work quickly and accurately. Often this requires observing the necessaryhealth and safety and indemnity insurance issues involved in working on a modernbuilding site with tight deadlines. Certain charities andlocal government bodies sometimes offer places on research projects either as part of academic work or as a defined community project.[citation needed] There is also a flourishing industry selling places on commercialtraining excavations and archaeological holiday tours.[citation needed]
Archaeologists prize local knowledge and often liaise with local historical and archaeological societies, which is one reason whyCommunity archaeology projects are starting to become more common. Often archaeologists are assisted by the public in the locating of archaeological sites, which professional archaeologists have neither the funding, nor the time to do.
Archaeological Legacy Institute (ALI), is a registered 501[c] [3] non-profit, media and education corporation registered in Oregon in 1999. ALI founded a website,The Archaeology Channel to support the organization's mission "to nurturing and bringing attention to the human cultural heritage, by using media in the most efficient and effective ways possible."[134]
There is a considerable international body of research focused on archaeology and public value and tangible benefits of archaeology include[135] helping to counteract racism, documenting accomplishments of ignored communities, providing time-depth as a response to short-termism of the modern age, and contributing to human ecology, independent evidence base, historic context development and tourism.[136] The delivery of public benefits through archaeology can be summarised as follows: through making a contribution to a shared history,[137] artistic and cultural treasures, local values, place-making and social cohesion, educational benefits, contribution to science and innovation, health and wellbeing, and added economic value to developers.[138][132]
Pseudoarchaeology is an umbrella term for all activities that falsely claim to be archaeological but in fact violate commonly accepted and scientific archaeological practices. It includes much fictional archaeological work (discussed above), as well as some actual activity. Many non-fiction authors have ignored the scientific methods of processual archaeology, or the specific critiques of it contained inpost-processualism.[citation needed]
An example of this type is the writing ofErich von Däniken. His 1968 book,Chariots of the Gods?, 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 aspalaeocontact theory, orAncient astronaut theory, is not exclusively Däniken's, nor did the idea originate with him. 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.[citation needed]
A looter's pit on the morning following its excavation, taken at Rontoy, Huaura Valley,Peru in June 2007. Several small holes left by looters' prospecting probes can be seen, as well as their footprints.
Looting of archaeological sites is an ancient problem. For instance, many of the tombs of the Egyptianpharaohs were looted duringantiquity.[139] Archaeology stimulates interest in ancient objects, and people in search of artifacts or treasure cause damage to archaeological sites. The commercial and academic demand for artifacts contributes directly to theillicit antiquities trade. Smuggling of antiquities abroad to private collectors has caused great cultural and economic damage in many countries whose governments lack the resources and or the will to deter it. Looters damage and destroy archaeological sites, denying future generations information about their ethnic and cultural heritage. Indigenous peoples especially lose access to and control over their 'cultural resources', ultimately denying them the opportunity to know their past.[140]
In 1937, W. F. Hodge the director of theSouthwest Museum released a statement that the museum would no longer purchase or accept collections from looted contexts.[141] The first conviction of the transport of artifacts illegally removed from private property under theArchaeological Resources Protection Act was in 1992 in the State of Indiana.[142]
Archaeologists trying to protect artifacts may be placed in danger by looters or locals trying to protect the artifacts from archaeologists who are viewed as looters by the locals.[143]
Some historical archaeology sites are subjected to looting bymetal detector hobbyists who search for artifacts using increasingly advanced technology. Efforts are underway among all major Archaeological organizations to increase education and legitimate cooperation between amateurs and professionals in the metal detecting community.[144]
While most looting is deliberate, accidental looting can occur when amateurs, who are unaware of the importance of Archaeological rigor, collect artifacts from sites and place them into private collections.
In the United States, examples such as the case ofKennewick Man have illustrated the tensions betweenNative Americans and archaeologists, which can be summarized as a conflict between a need to remain respectful toward sacred burial sites and the academic benefit from studying them. For years, American archaeologists dug on Indian burial grounds and other places considered sacred, removing artifacts and human remains to storage facilities for further study. In some cases human remains were not even thoroughly studied but instead archived rather than reburied. Furthermore, Western archaeologists' views of the past often differ from those of tribal peoples. The West views time as linear; for many 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.
As a consequence of this, American Indians attempted to prevent archaeological excavation of sites inhabited by their ancestors, while American archaeologists believed that the advancement of scientific knowledge was a valid reason to continue their studies. This contradictory situation was addressed by theNative American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA, 1990), which sought to reach a compromise by limiting the right of research institutions to possess human remains. Due in part to the spirit ofpostprocessualism, some archaeologists have begun to actively enlist the assistance ofindigenous peoples likely to be descended from those under study.
Archaeologists have also been obliged to re-examine what constitutes an archaeological site in view of what native peoples believe to constitute sacred space. To many native peoples, natural features such as lakes, mountains or even individual trees have cultural significance. Australian archaeologists especially have explored this issue and attempted to survey these sites to give them some protection from being developed. Such work requires close links and trust between archaeologists and the people they are trying to help and at the same time 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 have also been active efforts to recruit aboriginal peoples directly into the archaeological profession.
A new trend in the heated controversy betweenFirst Nations groups and scientists is therepatriation of native artifacts to the original descendants.[clarification needed] An example of this occurred on 21 June 2005, when community members and elders from a number of the 10Algonquian nations in theOttawa area convened on theKitigan Zibi reservation nearManiwaki, Quebec, to inter ancestral human remains and burial goods—some dating back 6,000 years. It was not determined, however, if the remains were directly related to theAlgonquin people who now inhabit the region. The remains may be of Iroquoian ancestry, since Iroquoian people inhabited the area before the Algonquin. Moreover, the oldest of these remains might have no relation at all to the Algonquin or Iroquois, and belong to an earlier culture who previously inhabited the area.[citation needed]
An inconspicuous rock mound marks the reburial site where close to 80 boxes of various sizes are buried. Because of this reburial, no further scientific study is possible. Although negotiations were at times tense between the Kitigan Zibi community and museum, they were able to reach agreement.[145]
African Diaspora Archaeology is an area of study within the subfield of historical archaeology that studies those that have been forcibly transported through theAtlantic Slave Trade, theTrans-Saharan Slave Trade, and theIndian Ocean Slave Trade, as well as their descendants. Although of global relevance, most research has been conducted in the Americas and Africa.[146][147]
In the United States, Similar to the experience of Native Americans, the history of African diaspora archaeology is one of controversies overWhiteness in archaeology and anthropology, a lack of inclusion of the African descendant community,[148] and possession of human remains in the collections of universities and museums.[149] In the 1990s, anthropologistMichael Blakey was the director of research during theNew York African Burial Ground Project where he initiated a protocol for collaborating with the African descendant community. In 2011, theSociety of Black Archaeologists was created in theUnited States.[150] Co-foundersAyana Omilade Flewellen, archaeologist at theUniversity of California, Riverside and Justin Dunnavant, archaeologist and assistant professor of anthropology at theUniversity of California, Los Angeles intend to build a restorative justice-based structure in archaeology. They suggest to define descendants not only in genealogical terms, but also to welcome input of African Americans whose ancestors had a shared historical experience in enslavement.[151]
TheUnited States Senate unanimously passed a bill[152] in December 2020 that centers African American cemeteries at risk in South Carolina. The bill is made to better protect historic African burial grounds and can lead to the creation of anAfrican American Burial Grounds Network.[153]Barbados, eight days after becoming arepublic on November 30, 2021, announced plans for the construction of theNewton Enslaved Burial Ground Memorial as well as a museum dedicated to the history of theAtlantic slave trade.[154] The Ghanaian-British architectDavid Adjaye is to lead the project that is to commemorate an estimated 570 West Africans buried in unmarked graves at the site of the former Newton sugar plantation.[154][155] Barbados can be seen as a good example of respectful preservation of an African burial ground. Throughout theAmericas however the burial grounds are in danger of being destroyed or human remains are being excavated without the descendant community being involved.[156][157][158][159][160] In 2022, residents onSint Eustatius,Dutch Caribbean spoke out strongly against what they found were unethical excavations of their ancestors on theGodet African Burial Ground and theGolden Rock African Burial Ground.[161]
As anthropogenicclimate change affects our environment, projections show that there will be changes in rainfall with increased drought and desertification, increases in intensity and frequency of rainfall, increases in temperature (winter and summer), increases in both the temperature and frequency of heatwaves, rising sea levels, and warmer seas, ocean acidification and changes in oceanic currents. These climate drivers will result in changes to flora and fauna, and changes in ground conditions (both on and below the surface) and so will also affect archaeological deposits and structures, while human responses to the climate crisis will also impact archaeological sites. The archaeologist's knowledge and skills are relevant to supporting society in adapting to a changing climate and a low carbon future.[162][163] Another effect of higher temperatures has been melting of glaciers and ice patches. This has led to the discovery of artifacts and bodies long buried in the ice, fostering the new field ofglacial archaeology.[164][165]
Archaeological sites can be seen as habitats that support ecosystems and fulfil biodiversity goals.[166]
Asartificial intelligence (AI) continues to influence scientific research, its application in archaeological studies has become increasingly significant. For instance, AI models have been utilized to identify archaeological remains inthe Empty Quarter of theArabian Peninsula.[167][168] Additionally, AI technology has facilitated the discovery of 303 new geoglyphs in Nazca.[169]
^Bueno, Christina (2016).The Pursuit of Ruins: Archaeology, History, and the Making of Modern Mexico. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. pp. 25 ff.
^Watrall, Ethan."Lecture 2"(PDF). History of Archaeology (ANP203). Anthropology.msu.edu. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on 8 April 2014. Retrieved7 April 2014.
^abTrigger, Bruce G. (2006).A History of Archaeological Thought (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.ISBN0-521-84076-7.
^abClunas, Craig (2004).Superfluous Things: Material culture and social status in early modern China. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.ISBN0-8248-2820-8.
^Fraser, Julius Thomas; Haber, Francis C. (1986).Time, Science, and Society in China and the West. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. p. 227.ISBN0-87023-495-1.
^Edward W. Bodnar,Later travels, with Clive Foss, introduction (pp. ix-xxiii)
^E. W. Bodnar,Cyriacus of Ancona and Athens, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1960.
^"Flavio Biondo".Encyclopaedia Britannica (Online ed.). 31 May 2021.Archived from the original on 27 October 2021. Retrieved27 October 2021.
^"John Leland".Encyclopaedia Britannica (Online ed.). 14 April 2021.Archived from the original on 22 April 2016. Retrieved27 October 2021.
^"William Camden".Encyclopaedia Britannica (Online ed.). 28 April 2021.Archived from the original on 27 October 2021. Retrieved27 October 2021.
^abCunliffe, B. W.; Colin Renfrew, B. W. C.; Cunliffe, P.; Davies, W.; Renfrew, C.; Davies, P.; et al. (2002).Archaeology: The widening debate. British Academy centenary monographs. British Academy. p. 309.ISBN978-0-19-726255-9.Archived from the original on 10 May 2022. Retrieved10 May 2022.
^Sime, James; Mitchell, John Malcolm (1911). "Winckelmann, Johann Joachim". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 28 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 707
^Robinson, Walter (1995)."Introduction".Instant Art History. Random House Publishing Group. p. 240.ISBN0-449-90698-1.The father of official art history was a German named Johann Joachim Winckelmann (1717–68).
^Everill, P. (2009). "Invisible pioneers".British Archaeology.108:40–43.
^Renfrew, Colin; Bahn, Paul G. (2015).Archaeology essentials: theories, methods, practice (3. ed.). London: Thames & Hudson. pp. 17–18.ISBN978-0-500-29159-7.
^MacGillivray, Joseph Alexander (2000).Minotaur: Sir Arthur Evans and the Archaeology of the Minoan Myth. New York, NY: Hill and Wang (Farrar, Straus and Giroux).
^Renfrew, Colin; Bahn, Paul G. (2015).Archaeology essentials: theories, methods, practice (3. ed.). London: Thames & Hudson. p. 24.ISBN978-0-500-29159-7.
^Adibe, Luiz Abdalla Filho; Gabriela, Bielefeld Nardoto; Leonardo, de Aro Galera; Janaina, Leite de Souza; Luiza, Santos Reis; Yeleine, Almoza Hernandez; Rebeca, Sales; Daniel, Guimarães Gerardi; Luiz, Antonio Martinelli (2019). "Is the 'canine surrogacy approach' (CSA) still valid for dogs and humans in market-oriented and subsistence-oriented communities in Brazil?".Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies.55 (3):227–236.Bibcode:2019IEHS...55..227A.doi:10.1080/10256016.2019.1598986.PMID30943760.S2CID93000409.
^"What is archaeology?".www.saa.org. Society for American Archaeology.Archived from the original on 25 August 2017. Retrieved25 August 2017.
^"Department of Archaeology".Sogaer.ex.ac.uk. The University of Exeter – SoGAER. 28 October 2008.Archived from the original on 21 June 2008. Retrieved5 May 2009.
^"Historic environment". Department for Culture Media and Sport. Culture.gov.uk. 28 April 2009.Archived from the original on 21 May 2009. Retrieved5 May 2009.
^UNESCO convenes Libyan and international experts meeting for the safeguard of Libya's cultural heritage. UNESCO World Heritage Center – News, 21. Oktober 2011.
^Roger O'Keefe, Camille Péron, Tofig Musayev, Gianluca Ferrari "Protection of Cultural Property. Military Manual." UNESCO, 2016, S. 73ff.
^Eric Gibson:The Destruction of Cultural Heritage Should be a War Crime. In: The Wall Street Journal, 2 March 2015.
^Eden Stiffman "Cultural Preservation in Disasters, War Zones. Presents Big Challenges" in The Chronicle Of Philanthropy, 11 May 2015.
^"UNESCO Director-General calls for stronger cooperation for heritage protection at the Blue Shield International General Assembly.", UNESCO – 13 September 2017.
^Friedrich Schipper: "Bildersturm: Die globalen Normen zum Schutz von Kulturgut greifen nicht" (German – The global norms for the protection of cultural property do not apply), In: Der Standard, 6 March 2015.
^abMcGeough, Kevin (2006). "Heroes, mummies, and treasure: Near Eastern archaeology in the movies".Near Eastern Archaeology.69 (3–4):174–185.doi:10.1086/NEA25067670.S2CID166381712.
^Minnis, P. E.; Kelly, D. S.; Sebastian, L.; Ingram, S. E.; Spielmann, K. A. (2006). "Answering the skeptic's question".The Society for American Archaeology Archaeological Record.6 (5).
^Wallace, Katie."Bones of contention".Canadian Geographic Online.Archived from the original on 18 February 2006. Retrieved4 October 2005.
^Singleton, Theresa (2010). "African Diaspora in Archaeology". In Olaniyan, Tejumola; Sweet, James (eds.).The African Diaspora and The Disciplines. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. pp. 119–134.ISBN978-0-253-35464-8.
^Fennell, Christopher (2020). "African Diaspora Archaeology".Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology (2nd ed.). Springer Cham. pp. 58–59.ISBN978-3-030-30018-0.
^Archaeology under the Blinding Light of Race. Michael L. Blakey inCurrent Anthropology 2020 61:S22, S183-S197
Billman, B. R.; Feinman, G. (1999).Settlement Pattern Studies in the Americas — Fifty Years Since Virú. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Fash, William (2001)."Archaeology". In David L. Carrasco (ed.).The Oxford Encyclopedia of Mesoamerican Cultures. Vol. 1. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 25–35.ISBN978-0-19-510815-6. Retrieved22 July 2020.
Flannery, K. V. (1967). "Culture History v. Culture Process: A Debate in American archaeology".Scientific American.217 (2):119–22.doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0867-119.
Flannery, K. V. (1982). "The Golden Marshalltown: A Parable for the Archaeology of the 1980s".American Anthropologist.84 (2):265–278.doi:10.1525/aa.1982.84.2.02a00010.
Fraser, Julius Thomas; Francis C. Haber (1986).Time, Science, and Society in China and the West. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Glascock, M. D.; Neff, H.; Stryker, K. S. & Johnson, T. N. (1994). "Sourcing archaeological obsidian by an abbreviated NAA procedure".Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry.180 (1):29–35.Bibcode:1994JRNC..180...29G.doi:10.1007/BF02039899.S2CID97455573.
Gifford-Gonzalez, D. P.; Damrosch, D. B.; Damrosch, D. R.; Pryor, J. & Thunen, R. L. (1985). "The Third Dimension in Site Structure: An Experiment in Trampling and Vertical Dispersal".American Antiquity.50 (4):803–818.doi:10.2307/280169.JSTOR280169.S2CID163218164.
Gladfelter, B. G. (1977). "Geoarchaeology: The Geomorphologist and Archaeology".American Antiquity.42 (4). Society for American Archaeology:519–538.doi:10.2307/278926.JSTOR278926.S2CID163453920.
Gould, R. (1971a). "The Archaeologist as Ethnographer: A Case from the Western Desert of Australia".World Archaeology.3 (2):143–177.doi:10.1080/00438243.1969.9979499.
Gould, R.; Koster, D. A. & Sontz, A. H. L. (1971b). "The Lithic Assemblage of the Western Desert Aborigines of Australia".American Antiquity.36 (2):149–169.doi:10.2307/278668.JSTOR278668.S2CID163617121.
Gould, R.; Yellen, J. (1987). "Man the hunted: Determinants of household spacing in desert and tropical foraging societies".Journal of Anthropological Archaeology.6 (1): 77.doi:10.1016/0278-4165(87)90017-1.
Haviland, William A.; Prins, Harald E. L.; McBride, Bunny; Walrath, Dana (2010).Cultural Anthropology: The human challenge (13th ed.). Cengage.ISBN978-0-495-81082-7.
Hinshaw, J. (2000).Ethnobotanical and Archaeobotanical Relationships: A Yuman case study. Salinas: Coyote Press. pp. 3–7,38–45.
Hodder, I. (1982).Symbols in Action. Cambridge University Press.
Hodder, I. (1985). "Post-processual archaeology". In Schiffer, M. B. (ed.).Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory. New York: Academic Press.
Hodder, I., ed. (1987).The Archaeology of Contextual Meaning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hodder, I. (1990). "Style as historical quality". In Hastorf, M. (ed.).The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.
Hodder, I. (1991). "Interpretive Archaeology and Its Role".American Antiquity.56 (1). Society for American Archaeology:7–18.doi:10.2307/280968.JSTOR280968.S2CID163936790.
Hodder, I. (1992).Theory and Practice in Archaeology. London, UK: Routeldge.
Kuznar, L., ed. (2001).Ethnoarchaeology of Andean South America. Ann Arbor, MI: International Monographs in Prehistory.
Miller, D.; Tilley, C. (1984). "Ideology, power, and prehistory: An introduction". In Miller, D.; Tilley, C. (eds.).Ideology, Power, and Prehistory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-0-521-25526-4.OCLC241599209.
Miller, D.; Rowlands, M.; Tilley, C., eds. (1989).Dominion and Resistance. New York, NY: Routledge.
Ogundele, S. O. (2005). "Ethnoarchaeology of domestic space and spatial behaviour among the Tiv and Ungwai of central Nigeria".African Archaeological Review.22 (1):25–54.doi:10.1007/s10437-005-3158-2.S2CID145452535.
Pauketat, T. R. (2001). "Practice and History in Archaeology: An Emerging Paradigm".Anthropological Theory.1 (1):73–98.doi:10.1177/14634990122228638 (inactive 4 December 2024).{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of December 2024 (link)
Saraydar, S. C.; Shimada, I. (1971). "A Quantitative Comparison of Efficiency Between A Stone Axe and A Steel Axe".American Antiquity.36 (2):216–217.doi:10.2307/278680.JSTOR278680.S2CID163927190.
Sellet, F.; Greaves, R. & Yu, P.-L. (2006).Archaeology and Ethnoarchaeology of Mobility. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
Shanks, M.; Tilley, C. (1987).Reconstructing Archaeology. New York: Cambridge university Press.
Shanks, M.; Tilley, C. (1988).Social Theory and Archaeology. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.ISBN978-0-7456-0184-7.
Shanks, M. (1991). "Some recent approaches to style and social reconstruction in classical archaeology".Archaeological Review from Cambridge.10:164–174.
Shanks, M. (1993). "Style and the design of a perfume jar from an Archaic Greek city state".Journal of European Archaeology.1 (1):77–106.doi:10.1179/096576693800731190.
Tassie, G. J.; Owens, L. S. (2010).Standards of Archaeological Excavations: A Fieldguide to the Methology, Recording Techniques and Conventions. London: GHP.ISBN978-1-906137-17-5.
Taylor, W. W. (1948).A Study of Archaeology. Menasha: American Anthropological Association.ISBN978-0-906367-12-4.
Willey, G. R. (1953).Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Virú Valley, Perú. Washington, D.C.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
Willey, G. (1968).Settlement Archaeology. Palo Alto, CA: National Press.
Wylie, A. (1985). "The reaction against analogy". In Schiffer, Michael B. (ed.).Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory. Orlando, FL: Academic Press. pp. 63–111.
Hodder, Ian; Shanks, Michael; Alexandri, Alexandar; Buchili, Victor; Carman, John; Last, Jonathan; Lucas, Gavin (2008)."Interpreting Archaeology: Finding Meaning in the Past".Routledge. London.Archived from the original on 16 August 2021. Retrieved18 June 2019.
Colin Renfrew & Paul Bahn –Archaeology: theories, methods and practice, 2nd edition (1996)
Smekalova, T. N.; Voss O.; & Smekalov S. L. (2008). "Magnetic Surveying in Archaeology. More than 10 years of using the Overhauser GSM-19 gradiometer". Wormianum.
.jpg)
.jpg)
_(2).jpg)
_within_the_southern_Mesopotamian_floodplains_(yellow).webp)
.jpg)
