   #copyright

Archaeology

2007 Schools Wikipedia Selection. Related subjects: Archaeology

   Archaeology, archeology, or archæology (from the Greek words αρχαίος =
   ancient and λόγος = word/speech/discourse) is the study of human
   cultures through the recovery, documentation and analysis of material
   remains and environmental data, including architecture, artifacts,
   biofacts, human remains, and landscapes.

   The goals of archaeology are to document and explain the origins and
   development of human culture, understand culture history, chronicle
   cultural evolution, and study human behaviour and ecology, for both
   prehistoric and historic societies. It is considered in North America
   to be one of the four sub-fields of anthropology.
   Roman theater, Alexandria, Egypt
   Enlarge
   Roman theatre, Alexandria, Egypt

Usage

   As with words such as encyclop(a)edia and gyn(a)ecology, archaeology
   traditionally has an ae combination; however, unlike in many other
   words, the ae is still widely retained. Contrary to popular belief in
   other parts of the world, the spelling archeology is not predominant in
   United States dictionaries, though it is the spelling used by the
   United States government organizations involved in the field. The
   traditional spelling, archaeology, continues to be the most common form
   in everyday writing throughout the world, including the U.S.A.

Origins and definition

   Prehistoric cave paintings. Altamira, Spain
   Enlarge
   Prehistoric cave paintings. Altamira, Spain

   Archaeology is the study of human culture using artifacts—material
   remains from humans in the past. In the Old World, archaeology has
   tended to focus on the study of physical remains, the methods used in
   recovering them and the theoretical and philosophical underpinnings in
   achieving the subject's goals. The discipline's roots in antiquarianism
   and the study of Latin and Ancient Greek provided it with a natural
   affinity with the field of history. In the the United States and,
   increasingly, in other parts of the world, archaeology is more commonly
   devoted to the study of human societies and is treated as one of the
   four subfields of Anthropology. The other subfields of anthropology
   supplement the findings of archaeology in a holistic manner. These
   subfields are cultural anthropology, which studies behavioural,
   symbolic, and material dimensions of culture; linguistics, which
   studies language, including the origins of language and language
   groups; and physical anthropology, which includes the study of human
   evolution and physical and genetic characteristics. Other disciplines
   also supplement archaeology, such as paleontology, paleozoology,
   paleoethnobotany, paleobotany, geography, geology, art history, and
   classics. Archaeology has been described as a craft that enlists the
   sciences to illuminate the humanities. The American archaeologist
   Walter Taylor asserted in his major work "A Study of Archeology" (1948,
   American Anthropological Association) that "Archaeology is neither
   history nor anthropology. As an autonomous discipline, it consists of a
   method and a set of specialised techniques for the gathering, or
   'production' of cultural information".

   Archaeology is an approach to understanding human culture through its
   material remains regardless of chronology. In England, archaeologists
   have uncovered the long-lost layouts of medieval villages abandoned
   after the crises of the 14th century and the equally lost layouts of
   17th century parterre gardens swept away by a change in fashion. In
   downtown New York City archaeologists have exhumed the 18th century
   remains of the Black burial ground. Traditional Archaeology is viewed
   as the study of pre-historical human cultures; that is cultures that
   existed before the development of writing for that culture. Historical
   archaeology is the study of cultures with some form of writing.

   In the study of relatively recent cultures, which have been observed
   and studied by Western scholars, archaeology is closely allied with
   ethnography. This is the case in large parts of North America, Oceania,
   Siberia, and other places where the study of archaeology mingles with
   the living traditions of the cultures being studied. Kennewick Man is
   an example of archaeology interacting with modern culture. In the study
   of cultures that were literate or had literate neighbours, history and
   archaeology supplement one another for broader understanding of the
   complete cultural context, as at Hadrian's Wall.

Importance and applicability

   Stonehenge, United Kingdom
   Enlarge
   Stonehenge, United Kingdom

   Often archaeology provides the only means to learn of the existence and
   behaviors of people in the past. Many thousands of cultures and
   societies and millions of people have come and gone across the
   millennia of which there simply is little or no written record - no
   history - or for which written records may be misrepresentative or
   incomplete. Writing as it is known and understood today did not exist
   anywhere in the world until about 5000 years ago, and only spread among
   a relatively small number of technologically advanced civilisations. In
   contrast Homo sapiens have existed for at least 200,000 years, and
   other species of Homo for millions of years (see Human evolution).
   These civilisations are, not coincidentally, the best-known; they have
   been open to the inquiry of historians for centuries, while the study
   of pre-historic cultures has arisen only recently. Even within a
   civilisation that is literate at some levels, many important human
   practices are not officially recorded. Any knowledge of the formative
   early years of human civilisation - the development of agriculture,
   cult practices of folk religion, the rise of the first cities - must
   come from archaeology.

   Even where written records do exist, they are invariably incomplete or
   biased to some extent. In many societies, literacy was restricted to
   the elite classes, such as the clergy or the bureaucracy of court or
   temple. The literacy even of an aristocracy 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
   rest of the populace. 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 reflect the biases, assumptions, cultural values and
   possibly deceptions of a limited range of individuals, usually only a
   fraction of the larger population. As such, written records cannot be
   trusted as a sole source. The material record is nearer to a fair
   representation of society, though it is subject to its own
   inaccuracies, such as sampling bias and differential preservation.

   In addition to their scientific importance, 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
   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 such
   unrealistic subjects are treated more seriously, accusations of
   pseudoscience are invariably levelled at their proponents (see
   Pseudoarchaeology, below). However, these endeavours, real and
   fictional, are not representative of the modern state of archaeology.

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, excavating sites in order
   to unearth the cultural remains therein, and classification and
   preservation techniques in order to analyse and keep these remains.
   Every phase of this process can be a source of information.

   The academic goals of archaeology are not universally agreed upon, and
   there are at least three broad, distinct theories of exactly what
   archaeological research should do. (These are beyond the scope of the
   present discussion, but are discussed below. See also Archaeological
   theory.) Nevertheless, there is much common ground.

Academic sub-disciplines

   As with most academic disciplines, there are a very large number of
   archaeological sub-disciplines characterised by a specific method or
   type of material (e.g. lithic analysis, music, archaeobotany),
   geographical or chronological focus (e.g. Near Eastern archaeology,
   Medieval archaeology), other thematic concern (e.g. maritime
   archaeology, landscape archaeology, battlefield archaeology), or a
   specific archaeological culture or civilisation (e.g. Egyptology).

Field methods

Survey

   Monte Alban archaeological site
   Enlarge
   Monte Alban archaeological site

   A modern archaeological project often begins with a 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 and middens, within a site. Each
   of these two goals may be accomplished with largely the same methods.

   Survey was not widely practiced 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 visible features there. Gordon Willey
   pioneered the technique of regional settlement pattern survey in 1949
   in the Viru Valley of coastal Peru, and survey of all levels became
   prominent with the rise of processual archaeology some years later.

   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 employ sampling
   methods.) It 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 as settlement
   patterns and settlement structure. Survey data are commonly assembled
   into maps, which may show surface features and/or artifact
   distribution.

   The simplest survey technique is surface survey. It involves combing an
   area, usually on foot but sometimes with the use of mechanised
   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 as augers, corers, and
   shovel test pits.

   Aerial survey is conducted using cameras attached to aircraft,
   balloons, or even kites. A bird's-eye view is useful for quick mapping
   of large or complex sites. Ariel 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 man
   made structure, such as a stone wall, will develop more slowly, while
   those above other types of features (such as middens) may develop more
   rapidly. Photographs of ripening grain, 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
   employs infrared, ground-penetrating radar wavelengths, and
   thermography.

   Archaeological geophysics can be the most effective way to see beneath
   the ground. Magnetometers detect minute deviations in the Earth's
   magnetic field caused by iron artifacts, kilns, some types of stone
   structures, and even ditches and middens. Devices that measure the
   electrical resistivity of the soil are also widely used. Most soils are
   moist below the surface, which gives them a relatively low resistivity.
   Features such as hard-packed floors or concentrations of stone have a
   higher resistivity.

   Although some archaeologists consider the use of metal detectors to be
   tantamount to treasure hunting, others deem them an effective tool in
   archaeological surveying. Examples of formal archaeological use of
   metal detectors include musketball distribution analysis on English
   Civil War battlefields, metal distribution analysis prior to excavation
   of a nineteenth century ship wreck, and service cable location during
   evaluation. Metal detectorists have also contributed to the
   archaeological record 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 the Portable Antiquities Scheme.

   Regional survey in underwater archaeology uses geophysical or remote
   sensing devices such as marine magnetometer, side-scan sonar, or
   sub-bottom sonar.

Excavation

   Archeological excavation which discovered prehistorical caves in Vill,
   Austria
   Enlarge
   Archeological excavation which discovered prehistorical caves in Vill,
   Austria

   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 as stratigraphy,
   three-dimensional structure, and verifiably primary context.

   Modern excavation techniques require that the precise locations of
   objects and features, known as their provenance or provenience, be
   recorded. This always involves determining their horizontal locations,
   and sometimes vertical position as well (also see Primary Laws of
   Archaeology). Similarly, their association, or relationship with nearby
   objects and features, needs to be recorded for later analysis. This
   allows the archaeologist to deduce what artefacts and features were
   likely used together and which may be from different phases of
   activity. For example, excavation of a site reveals its stratigraphy;
   if a site was occupied by a succession of distinct cultures, artefacts
   from more recent cultures will lie above those from more ancient
   cultures.

   Excavation is the most expensive phase of archaeological research.
   Also, as a destructive process, it carries ethical concerns. As a
   result, very few sites are excavated in their entirety. Sampling is
   even more important in excavation than in survey. It is common for
   large mechanical equipment, such as backhoes ( JCBs), to be used in
   excavation, especially to remove the topsoil ( overburden), though this
   method is increasingly used with great caution. Following this rather
   dramatic step, the exposed area is usually hand-cleaned with trowels or
   hoes to ensure that all features are apparent.

   The next task is to form a site plan and then use it to help decide the
   method of excavation. Features dug into the natural subsoil are
   normally excavated in portions in order to produce a visible
   archaeological section for recording. Scaled plans and sections of
   individual features are all drawn on site, black and white and colour
   photographs of them are taken, and recording sheets are filled in
   describing the context of each. All this information serves as a
   permanent record of the now-destroyed archaeology and is used in
   describing and interpreting the site.

Post-excavation analysis

   Once artifacts and structures have been excavated, or collected from
   surface surveys, it is necessary to properly study them, to gain as
   much data as possible. This process is known as post-excavation
   analysis, and is normally the most time-consuming part of the
   archaeological investigation. It is not uncommon for the final
   excavation reports on major sites to take years to be published.

   At its most basic, the artifacts found are cleaned, catalogued and
   compared to published collections, in order to classify them
   typologically and to identify other sites with similar artifact
   assemblages. However, a much more comprehensive range of analytical
   techniques are available through archaeological science, meaning that
   artifacts can be dated and their compositions examined. The bones,
   plants and pollen collected from a site can all be analysed (using the
   techniques of zooarchaeology, paleoethnobotany, and palynology), while
   any texts can usually be deciphered.

   These techniques frequently provide information that would not
   otherwise be known and therefore contribute greatly to the
   understanding of a site.

History of archaeology

   Gilt-metal and jade-inlaid pot. Qianlong reign in the Qing dynasty of
   China (c. 1700)
   Enlarge
   Gilt-metal and jade-inlaid pot. Qianlong reign in the Qing dynasty of
   China (c. 1700)

   The history of archaeology has been one of increasing
   professionalisation, and the use of an increasing range of techniques,
   to obtain as much data on the site being examined as possible.

   Excavations of ancient monuments and the collection of antiquities have
   been taking place for thousands of years, but these were mostly for the
   extraction of valuable or aesthetically pleasing artifacts.

   It was only in the 19th century that the systematic study of the past
   through its physical remains began to be carried out. A notable early
   development was the founding in Rome in 1829, by Eduard Gerhard and
   others, of the Institute for Archaeological Correspondence (Instituto
   di corrispondenza archeologica or Institut für archäologisches
   Korrespondenz). Archaeological methods were developed by both
   interested amateurs and professionals, including Augustus Pitt Rivers
   and William Flinders Petrie.

   This process was continued in the 20th century by such people as
   Mortimer Wheeler, whose highly disciplined approach to excavation
   greatly improved the quality of evidence that could be obtained.

   During the 20th century, the development of urban archaeology and then
   rescue archaeology have been important factors, as has the development
   of archaeological science, which has greatly increased the amount of
   data that it is possible to obtain.

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. The first major phase in the
   history of archaeological theory is commonly referred to as cultural,
   or culture, history, which was developed during the late 19th and early
   20th centuries.

   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", with hypothesis testing and the
   scientific method very important parts of what became known as
   processual archaeology.

   In the 1980s, a new movement arose led by the British archaeologists
   Michael Shanks, Christopher Tilley, Daniel Miller, and Ian Hodder. It
   questioned processualism's appeals to science and impartiality and
   emphasised the importance of relativism, becoming known as
   post-processual archaeology. However, this approach has been criticised
   by processualists as lacking scientific rigour. The validity of both
   processualism and post-processualism is still under debate.

   Archaeological theory now borrows from a wide range of influences,
   including neo-Darwinian evolutionary thought, phenomenology,
   postmodernism, agency theory, cognitive science, Functionalism,
   gender-based and Feminist archaeology, and Systems theory.

Public archaeology

   Largest archaeology site in the Middle East. Bet She'an, Israel
   Enlarge
   Largest archaeology site in the Middle East. Bet She'an, Israel

   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 (such as The Mummy and
   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 not so reliably sensational. 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".

   Nevertheless, archaeology has profited from its portrayal in the
   mainstream media. Many practitioners point to the childhood excitement
   of Indiana Jones films and Tomb Raider games as the inspiration for
   them to enter the field. Archaeologists are also very much reliant on
   public support, the question of exactly who they are doing their work
   for is often discussed. Without a strong public interest in the
   subject, often sparked by significant finds and celebrity
   archaeologists, it would be a great deal harder for archaeologists to
   gain the political and financial support they require.

   In the UK, popular archaeology programmes such as Time Team and Meet
   the Ancestors have resulted in a huge upsurge in public interest. Where
   possible, archaeologists now make more provision for public involvement
   and outreach in larger projects than they once did, and many local
   archaeological organisations operate within the Community archaeology
   framework to expand public involvement in smaller-scale, more local
   projects. However, the move towards being more professional has meant
   that volunteer places are now often relegated to unskilled labour, and
   even this is less freely available than before. Developer-funded
   excavation necessitates a well-trained staff that can work quickly and
   accurately, observing the necessary health and safety and indemnity
   insurance issues involved in working on a modern building site with
   tight deadlines. Certain charities and local government bodies
   sometimes offer places on research projects either as part of academic
   work or as a defined community project. There is also a flourishing
   industry selling places on commercial training excavations and
   archaeological holiday tours.

   Archaeologists prize local knowledge and often liaise with local
   historical and archaeological societies, which is one reason why
   Community archaeology projects are starting to become more common.
   Anyone looking to get involved in the field without having to pay to do
   so should contact a local group.

Pseudoarchaeology

   Pseudoarchaeology is an umbrella term for all activities that claim to
   be archaeological but in fact violate commonly accepted 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 in post-processualism.

   An example of this type is the writing of Erich von Däniken. His
   Chariots of the Gods (1968), together with many subsequent lesser-known
   works, expounds a theory of ancient contacts between human civilisation
   on Earth and more technologically advanced extraterrestrial
   civilisations. This theory, known as palaeocontact 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.

Looting

   Stela Stela of a king named Adad-Nirari. Object stolen from the Iraq
   National Museum in the looting in connection with the Iraq war of 2003.
   Enlarge
   Stela Stela of a king named Adad-Nirari. Object stolen from the Iraq
   National Museum in the looting in connection with the Iraq war of 2003.

   Looting of archaeological sites by people in search of hoards 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 and public interest,
   but it has also attracted unwelcome attention to the works of past
   peoples. A brisk commercial demand for artifacts encourages looting and
   the illicit antiquities trade, which smuggles items abroad to private
   collectors. Looters damage the integrity of a historic site, deny
   archaeologists valuable information that would be learnt from
   excavation, and are often deemed to be robbing local people of their
   heritage.

   The popular consciousness often associates looting with poor Third
   World countries. Many are former homes to many well-known ancient
   civilizations but lack the financial resources or political will to
   protect even the most significant sites. Certainly, the high prices
   that intact objects can command relative to a poor farmer's income make
   looting a tempting financial proposition for some local people.
   However, looting has taken its toll in places as rich and populous as
   the United States and Western Europe as well. Abandoned towns of the
   ancient Sinagua people of Arizona, clearly visible in the desert
   landscape, have been destroyed in large numbers by treasure hunters.
   Sites in more densely populated areas farther east have also been
   looted. Where looting is proscribed by law it takes place under cover
   of night, with the metal detector a common instrument used to identify
   profitable places to dig.

Public outreach

   Motivated by a desire to halt looting, curb pseudoarchaeology, and to
   secure greater public funding and appreciation for their work,
   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 and their own heritage. Common methods of public
   outreach include press releases and the encouragement of school field
   trips to sites under excavation.

   The final audience for archaeologists' work is the public and it is
   increasingly realised that their work is ultimately being done to
   benefit and inform them. The putative social benefits of local heritage
   awareness are also being promoted with initiatives to increase civic
   and individual pride through projects such as community excavation
   projects and better interpretation and presentation of existing sites.

Descendant peoples

   In the United States, examples such as the case of Kennewick Man have
   illustrated the tensions between Native Americans and archaeologists
   which can be summarised as a conflict between a need to remain
   respectful towards burials sacred 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. To an archaeologist, the past is
   long-gone and must be reconstructed through its material remains; to
   indigenous peoples, it is often still alive.

   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 the Native 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 of postprocessualism, some
   archaeologists have begun to actively enlist the assistance of
   indigenous 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 in order 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.

Repatriation

   A new trend in the heated controversy between First Nations groups and
   scientists is the repatriation of native artifacts to the original
   descendants. An example of this occurred June 21, 2005, when a
   community members and elders from a number of the 10 Algonquian nations
   in the Ottawa area convened on the Kitigan Zibi reservation in
   Kanawagi, Quebec, to inter ancestral human remains and burial goods —
   some dating back 6,000 years.

   The ceremony marked the end of a journey spanning thousands of years
   and many miles. The remains and artifacts, including beads, tools and
   weapons, were originally excavated from various sites in the Ottawa
   Valley, including Morrison and the Allumette Islands. They had been
   part of the Canadian Museum of Civilization’s research collection for
   decades, some since the late 1800s. Elders from various Algonquin
   communities conferred on an appropriate reburial, eventually deciding
   on traditional redcedar and birchbark boxes lined with redcedar chips,
   muskrat and beaver pelts.

   Now, an inconspicuous rock mound marks the reburial site where close to
   90 boxes of various sizes are buried. Although negotiations were at
   times tense between the Kitigan Zibi community and museum, they were
   able to reach agreement

   Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology"
   This reference article is mainly selected from the English Wikipedia
   with only minor checks and changes (see www.wikipedia.org for details
   of authors and sources) and is available under the GNU Free
   Documentation License. See also our Disclaimer.
