Academic literature on the topic 'Archaeology of Europe'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Archaeology of Europe.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Archaeology of Europe"
1
Quirós Castillo, Juan Antonio. "Archaeology of Architecture and Archaeology of houses in Early Medieval Europe." Arqueología de la Arquitectura, no. 9 (April 9, 2013): 131–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.3989/arqarqt.2012.11601.
Full text
2
Pluciennik, Mark. "Archaeology, archaeologists and ‘Europe’." Antiquity 72, no. 278 (December 1998): 816–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0003598x0008741x.
Full textAbstract:
With changes in political structures, a pan-European dimension is increasing in importance for many archaeologists, because of cultural policy and funding from the Council of Europe and, especially, the European Union. Although nationalist frameworks are currently more important, archaeologists should keep a critical eye on European developments.
3
Harke, Heinrich, Margarita Diaz-Andreu, and Timothy Champion. "Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe." American Journal of Archaeology 102, no. 1 (January 1998): 185. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/506142.
Full text
4
Crabtree, Pam. "The Archaeology of Medieval Europe." History Compass 7, no. 3 (May 2009): 879–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-0542.2009.00594.x.
Full text
5
Zimmermann, A., K. P. Wendt, T. Frank, and J. Hilpert. "Landscape Archaeology in Central Europe." Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 75 (2009): 1–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0079497x00000281.
Full textAbstract:
Estimations of population density, which consider regional variability, are an important key variable in archaeology as they have consequences not only for the environmental but also for the economical and social domains. In this paper, a ten-step procedure of a consistent group of methods is described which deals with the data required for estimations of population density at different scale levels (from excavation to large-scale distribution maps). For distribution maps, a method is presented by which densities of sites are displayed using optimal isolines. These demarcate so called ‘settlement areas’ at scales of between 1:25,000 and 1:2.5 million. Our knowledge of the density of households from key areas with the most complete archaeological records is upscaled for the regions within these isolines. The results of this procedure are estimations of population density for the early Neolithic (Bandkeramik, 51st century BC) and the Roman period (2nd century AD) for regions with some 10,000 km2.A simple statistical/graphical method is developed to analyse the relationship between settlement areas, soils, and precipitation. Taking into account the aspects of preservation of sites and the intensity of archaeological observations, an analysis of patterns of land use shows that in prehistory not all areas suitable for use were in fact incorporated into settlement areas. For prehistory, the idea of a most optimised use of land up to its carrying capacity (as it has been proposed for at least 50 years) can be falsified for specific areas. A large number of empty regions with good ecological conditions but lacking in settlement activity can be discussed as resulting from culture historical processes. As an example, the separation of areas inhabited by groups of different identities is discussed. The amount of used space (in terms of ‘settlement area’) however, increases from the early Neolithic to the 4th century BC from 5% to more than 40%. The increase between the Neolithic and the Iron Age is understood in terms of technological developments in farming systems. The percentage of areas with suitable conditions actually utilised between the Bandkeramik and Iron Age increases from 31.1% to 67.5% in the area covered by the Geschichtlicher Atlas der Rheinlande, and is much higher still in the Roman period (84.3%). State societies seem to use the land more efficiently compared to non-state systems. This is becoming even clearer on consideration of the intensity of human impact.Large-scale distribution maps dividing the Neolithic in five periods were analysed. In each of the periods large settlement areas seem to be characterised either by the development of specific cultural innovations or by exchange of a specific raw material. In the course of time, the size of settlement areas in a specific region fluctuates markedly. It is most plausible to assume that this is due to a remarkable mobility of seemingly sedentary populations. Individual families recombine to new socio-cultural units every few hundred years.The relationship between size of settlement areas and the number of households can be used to develop ideas relating to the flow of exchange goods. An example for the Bandkeramik considering the Rijckholt-Flint is presented. The combination of the number of households and the percentage of this raw material in the specific settlement areas visualises the amount needed and the amount transferred to other settlement areas in the neighbourhood. A future economical archaeology could use this information to develop ideas relating to the importance of the economic sector, ie, ‘procurement of flint’ in relation to the ‘production of foodstuffs’ according to the time required for each group of activities.In the last section, the relationship between settlement areas and human impact is discussed. For the periods of subsistence economy, it is argued that the size of the population and its farming system are the two most important factors. For example, in Bandkeramik settlement areas, approximately 2% of the forest covering the landscape was cut down; in Roman times, and depending on the intensity of farming, this reaches magnitudes of between 20% and 50%. Although some of the methods and arguments used in this paper may be exchanged for better ones in the future, it is already apparent that a consistent system of methods is essential to transfer results of analyses on a lower scale level as input on a higher level and vice versa.
6
Kristiansen, Kristian. "Do we need the ‘archaeology of Europe’?" Archaeological Dialogues 15, no. 1 (June 2008): 5–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1380203808002419.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIs there anything coherently ‘European’ about a European archaeology – or rather, about the ‘archaeology of Europe’ – or is it simply a modern political construct with no meaning in the ancient past? This paper analyses European archaeology through a historical perspective, tracing developments in the areas of archaeological conservation (heritage), thinking (theory/interpretations) and publication and teaching. It critically examines a perceived trend in archaeology from a national towards a European framework, and concludes instead that local and regional frameworks have become stronger in all three areas. To move forward, we should use our understanding of the relationship between ideology, politics and archaeology to promote a research agenda that actively contributes to the formation of critical knowledge about the conditions for heritage and research in contemporary society. There is scope for an archaeology that addresses fundamental historical problems and long-term histories of the various geographically and culturally interlinked regions of Europe.
7
Klejn, Leo S. "To separate a centaur: on the relationship of archaeology and history in Soviet tradition." Antiquity 67, no. 255 (June 1993): 339–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0003598x00045397.
Full textAbstract:
The relationship between archaeology and history is not just an abstract theoretical question: it is one which determines the practical organization of archaeological activity and the publication of its results. It is a general problem of archaeology in Europe, where the subject has had to differentiate itself from the historical study of a long series of literate cultures; and it is especially acute in the former Soviet bloc, where a Marxist orthodoxy of historical science formerly prevailed. Leo Klejn is Russaian archaeology's most distinguished theoretician. Here he discusses in his own words both the academic sociology of the historical sciences and the role which he sees for archaeology within them.
8
Andersen, Michael. "Archaeology and Sigillography in Northern Europe." Medieval Globe 4, no. 1 (2018): 213–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.17302/tmg.4-1.8.
Full textAbstract:
Medieval seals, traditionally considered from the perspective of their documentary function, may also be studied as archaeological artefacts. Pilgrim badges were seal-shaped, and seal matrices and seal impressions can be found on church bells, in altars, and in burial sites. The context in which matrices are excavated provides valuable information on the practices of sealing and on the values attached to seals. This article also reveals a hitherto undescribed late medieval practice whereby papal and Scandinavian royal correspondents exchanged seal matrices.
9
Nicoll, Kathleen. "Book Review: Alluvial archaeology in Europe." Holocene 14, no. 5 (July 2004): 797–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/095968360401400522.
Full text
10
Papagianni, Dimitra. "Palaeolithic archaeology in an united Europe." Antiquity 77, no. 298 (December 2003): 842–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0003598x00061780.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Archaeology of Europe"
1
Ojala, Carl-Gösta. "Sámi Prehistories : The Politics of Archaeology and Identity in Northernmost Europe." Doctoral thesis, Uppsala universitet, Arkeologi, 2009. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-108857.
Full textAbstract:
Throughout the history of archaeology, the Sámi (the indigenous people in northern Norway, Sweden, Finland and the Kola Peninsula in the Russian Federation) have been conceptualized as the “Others” in relation to the national identity and (pre)history of the modern states. It is only in the last decades that a field of Sámi archaeology that studies Sámi (pre)history in its own right has emerged, parallel with an ethnic and cultural revival among Sámi groups. This dissertation investigates the notions of Sámi prehistory and archaeology, partly from a research historical perspective and partly from a more contemporary political perspective. It explores how the Sámi and ideas about the Sámi past have been represented in archaeological narratives from the early 19th century until today, as well as the development of an academic field of Sámi archaeology. The study consists of four main parts: 1) A critical examination of the conceptualization of ethnicity, nationalism and indigeneity in archaeological research. 2) A historical analysis of the representations and debates on Sámi prehistory, primarily in Sweden but also to some extent in Norway and Finland, focusing on four main themes: the origin of the Sámi people, South Sámi prehistory as a contested field of study, the development of reindeer herding, and Sámi pre-Christian religion. 3) An analysis of the study of the Sámi past in Russia, and a discussion on archaeological research and constructions of ethnicity and indigeneity in the Russian Federation and the Soviet Union. 4) An examination of the claims for greater Sámi self-determination concerning cultural heritage management and the debates on repatriation and reburial in the Nordic countries. In the dissertation, it is argued that there is a great need for discussions on the ethics and politics of archaeological research. A relational network approach is suggested as a way of opening up some of the black boxes and bounded, static entities in the representations of people in the past in the North.
2
Garefalakis, Charalampos. "Neanderthal archaeology in MIS 3 Western Europe : ecological and anthropological perspectives." Thesis, University of Southampton, 2009. https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/366711/.
Full text
3
Hopkinson, Terry. "The Middle Palaeolithic leaf points of Europe : an ecological geography." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2001. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/272320.
Full text
4
Sanders, Jeffrey R. "Sacral landscapes : narratives of the megalith in north western Europe." Thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2007. http://hdl.handle.net/1842/2671.
Full textAbstract:
The construction of archaeological narrative is influenced by a number of factors. Some come from within disciplinary boundaries, whilst others are traced from the wider influences of social, cultural or academic contexts. This thesis examines three areas identified as Neolithic ‘landscapes’, all of which have been the subject of archaeological investigation since the 19th century. The history of research of these areas allows an evaluation of how these disparate influences interact. In this way, the three landscapes act as an arena in which to explore aspects of the archaeological approach itself. This leads to a critical examination of the interpretative tools available to the archaeologist. How concepts such as ‘landscape’ are formed and affect discourse is explored. Wider themes of demarcation, typology and the underlying assumptions of research are investigated in relation to the interpretation of the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age of North Western Europe. The large span of time that these periods encompass allows exploration of change from the short to very long term, although this is not always utilised within archaeological accounts. The treatment of time is therefore considered in conjunction with explanations of change in prehistory. A powerful approach to time is suggested by combining aspects of the work of Pierre Bourdieu and Fernand Braudel and the potential for this is evaluated against the archaeological record of the three areas. How the assumptions of the archaeological approach are acted out within the historiography of each area highlights a number of recurring metaphors that are used to interpret the material record. These promote a portrayal of Neolithic life that combines with the range of influences from the history of archaeology itself to promote an idea of the prehistoric mentalité. A very durable and underlying type that constantly resurfaces in these accounts is the idea of the ‘sacral landscape’, which is the central topic of this thesis.
5
Kofidou, Fotini. "Lithics and personhood in the Lateglacial of north west Europe." Thesis, University of Southampton, 2009. https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/349469/.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis examines aspects of human personhood as expressed through lithic artefacts in north west Europe during the Lateglacial. The research sites are Hengistbury Head in Britain, Rekem in Belgium and a cluster of sites in the Neuwied Basin, in Central Rhineland. The case studies cover the period of the Lateglacial Interstadial complex, about 15,500 -13,000 cal years BP. The work aims at exploring the social practice of creating hunter-gatherer personhood in given social, temporal, spatial and material contexts. The discussion centres on the social and embodied nature of lithic technology as a means of negotiating the human person. In doing so, this study situates the discourse of the reciprocal and mutually constructing relationship between humans and objects at the core level of the individual. Placed within social archaeological theory, the research adopts an outlook of social practice as an active manner of involvement. Relational entanglements between humans and things can accumulate or enchain the physical and metaphorical resources of the world, consequently leading to stasis or transformation. Therefore this thesis demonstrates that continuity and change in the archaeological record are associated with expressions of self ontologies. Further, the work suggests that, in order to comprehend this material variability, it would be helpful to consider the Lateglacial as a dynamic process of hybrid engagements instead of a fixed chronological and cultural unit.
6
Fluck, Hannah Louise. "Non-biface assemblages in Middle Pleistocene Western Europe : a comparative study." Thesis, University of Southampton, 2011. https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/344708/.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis presents the results of an investigation into the Clactonian assemblages of Middle Pleistocene souther Britain. By exploring other non-biface assemblages (NBAs) reported from elsewhere in Europe it seeks to illuminate our understanding of the British assemblages by viewing them in a wider context. It sets out how the historical and geopolitical context of Palaeolithic research has influenced what is investigated and how, as well as interpretations of assemblages without handaxes. A comparative study of the assemblages themselves based upon primary data gathered specifically for that purpose concludes that while there are a number of non-biface assemblages elsewhere in Europe the Clactonian assemblages do appear to be a phenomenon unique to the Thames Valley in early MIS 11. However, traditional explanations for this phenomenon, such as cultural variation, cultural migration and pioneer populations are challenged and a new interpretation centred on the concept of a default flaking pattern is proposed.
7
Williams, Michael A. "Shamanic interpretations : reconstructing a cosmology for the later prehistoric period of north-western Europe." Thesis, University of Reading, 2001. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.391352.
Full text
8
Stratton, Susan. "Burial and identity in the Late Neolithic and Copper Age of south-east Europe." Thesis, Cardiff University, 2016. http://orca.cf.ac.uk/98634/.
Full textAbstract:
In the Late Neolithic of south-east Europe, c. 5000 cal BC, a new form of burial practice appeared, as communities started to bury their dead in discrete extramural cemeteries. At the same time as this new formal burial practice, we see an increase in the number of grave goods placed with burials. There was a greater interest in the expression of identity through objects in the mortuary realm. This change was not simultaneous across the region of south-east Europe. It took two different trajectories, one in the Lower Danube and Black Sea coast region (the eastern region) and another in the Carpathian Basin (the western region). In the eastern region, cemeteries appear as discrete formal areas to bury the dead suddenly, c. 5000 cal BC, in stark contrast to the unknown burial practice that preceded it. In the western region, settlement burial in groups became the norm first, before fully extramural cemeteries appeared c. 4400 cal BC. This thesis analyses a number of these first cemeteries from both regions, looking at who was buried in them and what they were buried with. It is interested in what was being expressed about individual and social identity in the mortuary context. It uses correspondence analysis to look for patterns within the grave goods which may reveal specific social identities, such as age grades, gender or status. It concludes that the expression of difference through the body was an important part of the emergence of cemetery use. Furthermore, it provides new data about the timing of cemetery emergence by radiocarbon dating the Romanian cemetery site of Cernica.
9
Bestley, Nicola. "Material culture and cosmology : megalithic monuments and ritual practice in the Neolithic of north-west Europe." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2001. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/272337.
Full text
10
Klevnäs, Alison Margaret. "Whodunnit? : grave-robbery in early medieval northern and western Europe." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2011. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/236124.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis brings together all that is currently known of early medieval grave reopening in northern and western Europe. It investigates in detail an intensive outbreak of grave-robbery in 6th-7th century Kent. This is closely related to the same phenomenon in Merovingia: an example of the import of not only material goods but also a distinctive cultural practice. Limited numbers of similar robbing episodes, affecting a much smaller proportion of graves in each cemetery, are also identified elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon England. Although the phenomenon of grave-robbery is well-attested in Merovingia, this research is the first study at a regional level. The aim is to advance the debate about early medieval robbery from general discussion of interpretative possibilities to evaluation of specific models and their compatibility with the archaeological evidence. The conclusions have significant implications for the interpretation of grave-robbery across early medieval Europe. In Kent robbing is at a level that must be considered in any discussion of cemetery evidence. The poor publication record has inhibited recognition and analysis of robbing in the county. However, by using extensive archive material, this thesis has shown that the practice of ransacking graves was on a similar scale in East Kent as in Merovingia. This research identifies over 200 reopened graves across Kent, with at least 15 sites affected. At the most intensely robbed sites, an average of over 20% of burials were disturbed. Robbing is likely to have had a significant impact on artefact finds, especially from the late 6th century onwards. Grave-robbery opens a window onto the wider meanings and values of grave-good types within the early medieval period. The analysis in this thesis demonstrates that the main motive for reopening was the removal of grave goods. However, straightforward personal enrichment was not the goal. A deliberate, consistent selection of certain grave-good types were taken from burials, while other apparently covetable possessions were left behind. The desired grave-goods were removed even when in an unusable condition. It is argued that the selection of goods for removal was related to their symbolic roles in the initial burial rite. Their taking was intended to harm living descendants by damaging the prestige and strength of the dead. In addition to the robbed graves, there is a small number of graves spread across the sites which were reopened for bodily mutilation or rearrangement of skeletal parts. These closely resemble the better known deviant burial rites which were applied to certain corpses at the time of initial burial and are interpreted as a reaction to fear of revenants. In modern Britain burial is a finite and final process: the definitive disposal of a dead body. The archaeological and ethnographic records contain many examples of more complex series of events to enable the dead to move on from the living. The material remains of such processes can be seen in revisited and reopened graves, and in myriad manipulations of human bodies. This case study is a detailed, contextualised investigation of the after-history of burial monuments focused on the early Middle Ages.
Books on the topic "Archaeology of Europe"
1
Mehler, Natascha. Historical archaeology in Central Europe. Edited by Society for Historical Archaeology. Rockville, MD: Society for Historical Archaeology, 2013.
Find full text
2
Thomas, Homer L. A handbook of archaeology: Cultures and sites : North Africa, Egypt, Southwest Asia, Mediterranean, Northwest Europe, Northern Europe, Central Europe, Southeast Europe, Eastern Europe, Western Asia. Jonsered: P. Åströms, 1993.
Find full text
3
Thomas, Homer L. A handbook of archaeology: Cultures and sites : North Africa, Egypt, Southwest Asia, Mediterranean, Northwest Europe, Northern Europe, Central Europe, Southeast Europe, Eastern Europe, Western Asia. Jonsered: Åströms, 1994.
Find full text
4
Thomas, Homer L. A handbook of archaeology: Cultures and sites : North Africa, Egypt, Southwest Asia, Mediterranean, Northwest Europe, Northern Europe, Central Europe, Southeast Europe, Eastern Europe, Western Asia. Jonsered: Åströms, 1993.
Find full text
5
Archaeology of identity =: Archäologie der Identität. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2010.
Find full text
6
An archaeology of natural places. London: Routledge, 2000.
Find full text
7
Urbańczyk, Przemysław, ed. Origins of Central Europe. Warsaw: Scientific Society of Polish Archaeologists, 1997.
Find full text
8
Guido, Helmig, Scholkmann Barbara, and Untermann Matthias, eds. Centre, region, periphery: Medieval Europe Basel 2002. Hertingen: Folio Verlag Dr. G. Wesselkamp, 2002.
Find full text
9
The archaeology of early medieval villages in Europe. [Leioa, Biscay]: Universidad del País Vasco, Servicio Editorial = Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, Argitalpen Zerbitzua, 2009.
Find full text
10
Carver, M. O. H. Arguments in stone: Archaeological research and the European town in the first millennium. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 1993.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Archaeology of Europe"
1
Babits, Lawrence E., and Hans Tilburg. "Northern Europe: Bibliography." In Maritime Archaeology, 117. Boston, MA: Springer US, 1998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0084-5_14.
Full text
2
King, Chris. "Post-Medieval Archaeology (Europe)." In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 8798–806. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30018-0_1408.
Full text
3
Lozny, Ludomir R. "Western Europe: Historical Archaeology." In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 11208–21. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30018-0_1542.
Full text
4
Liddiard, Robert. "Europe Incastellated: Medieval Archaeology." In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 3988–96. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30018-0_1708.
Full text
5
Lozny, Ludomir R. "Western Europe: Historical Archaeology." In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 1–14. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_1542-2.
Full text
6
King, Chris. "Post-Medieval Archaeology (Europe)." In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 6066–74. New York, NY: Springer New York, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_1408.
Full text
7
Lozny, Ludomir R. "Western Europe: Historical Archaeology." In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 7786–97. New York, NY: Springer New York, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_1542.
Full text
8
Liddiard, Robert. "Europe Incastellated: Medieval Archaeology." In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 2553–61. New York, NY: Springer New York, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_1708.
Full text
9
Mehler, Natascha. "Historical archaeology in Europe." In The Routledge Handbook of Global Historical Archaeology, 780–97. New York : Routledge, 2020.: Routledge, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315202846-41.
Full text
10
Otte, Marcel. "Europe: Paleolithic Art." In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 4027–35. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30018-0_1985.
Full textConference papers on the topic "Archaeology of Europe"
1
Hermon, Sorin. "BUILDING DIGILAB – TOWARDS A DATA-DRIVEN RESEARCH IN CULTURAL HERITAGE." In VIRTUAL ARCHAEOLOGY. SIBERIAN FEDERAL UNIVERSITY, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.17516/sibvirarch-012.
Full textAbstract:
E-RIHS – The European Research Infrastructure on Heritage Science, aims at providing new knowledge on the research, conservation and restoration of works of art, heritage assets, monuments and sites. As such, the target of its scientific investigation (paintings, sculptures, manuscripts, frescoes, icons, archaeological artefacts, building facades, architectural remains or heritage buildings, coins or ancient musical instruments, just to name a few) are stored in the hundreds of museums, art galleries, private collections and various other institutions, scattered all over Europe.
2
Sidorov, Vladimir. "PHILOSOPHY OF ARCHAEOLOGY." In Evolution of Neolithic cultures of Eastern Europe. Samara State University of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.31600/978-5-91867-189-4-2019-74-79.
Full text
3
Soreide, Fredrik, and Marek E. Jasinski. "Deepwater archaeology - status and potential." In OCEANS 2009-EUROPE (OCEANS). IEEE, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/oceanse.2009.5278167.
Full text
4
Citiriga, Daniel. "THE FEDERALIST PROJECTS TYPOLOGY IN CENTRAL EUROPE AT THE END OF THE WWI." In SGEM 2014 Scientific SubConference on ANTHROPOLOGY, ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY. Stef92 Technology, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.5593/sgemsocial2014/b31/s10.079.
Full text
5
Broka-Lāce, Zenta. "Latvijas arheoloģija pēc 1940. gada = Latvian archaeology after 1940." In Anthropology of Political, Social and Cultural Memory: Practices in Central and Eastern Europe. University of Latvia, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.22364/apscm.2020.01.
Full text
6
Genito, Bruno. "An Archaeology of the Nomadic Groups of the Eurasian Steppes between Europe and Asia." In 7thInternational Conference on the Medieval History of the Eurasian Steppe. Szeged: University of Szeged, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.14232/sua.2019.53.95-109.
Full text
7
Oczipka, M., J. Bemmann, H. Piezonka, J. Munkabayar, B. Ahrens, M. Achtelik, and F. Lehmann. "Small drones for geo-archaeology in the steppe: locating and documenting the archaeological heritage of the Orkhon Valley in Mongolia." In SPIE Europe Remote Sensing, edited by Ulrich Michel and Daniel L. Civco. SPIE, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.830404.
Full text
8
Mielczarek, Mariusz. "Poles in the archaeology of Central asia. History and present day." In Antiquities of East Europe, South Asia and South Siberia in the context of connections and interactions within the Eurasian cultural space (new data and concepts). Institute for the History of Material Culture Russian Academy of Sciences, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.31600/978-5-907053-34-2-127.
Full text
9
"Photography in Indonesian Archaeology of the 19th to the Early 20th Century | Fotografi dalam Arkeologi Indonesia pada Abad ke-19 sampai Awal Abad ke-20 Masehi." In The SEAMEO SPAFA International Conference on Southeast Asian Archaeology and Fine Arts (SPAFACON2021). SEAMEO SPAFA, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.26721/spafa.pqcnu8815a-28.
Full textAbstract:
In Dutch East India, photographic documentation for antiquities was as up-to-date as in Europe that was developed in the last half of the 19th century. Photography became a tool for archaeological surveys which resulted in thousands of enormous resources. In this paper, the historical background regarding how these old photographs were collected and how the material circulated within archaeological activities will be elaborated. The timeline studied is limited to pre-independence Indonesia with the subject mostly focused on Hindu-Buddhist remains. The method used is literature review of both relevant new publications as well as significant old publications. Its turns out that photographic surveys of archaeology in Indonesia during the colonial period developed from early archaeological activities into systematic institutional programs. The qualities of photography were appreciated in miscellaneous application and offered substantial benefits. Photography became a documentation medium, publication complementary, archive, and object representation and substitution. This historical background of photography in the context of Indonesian archaeology marks the significant value of these photographs so that it can be the foundation of preservation for the future. Di Hindia Belanda, dokumentasi fotografis pada tinggalan purbakala sangat mutakhir sebagaimana di Eropa yang dikembangkan sejak paruh terakhir abad ke-19 M. Fotografi menjadi perangkat untuk survei arkeologi yang menghasilkan ribuan sumber daya. Dalam tulisan ini, latar belakang sejarah terkait pengumpulan foto lama tersebut serta penggunaannya dalam berbagai aktifitas arkeologi akan dijabarkan. Lini masa yang dikaji dibatasi pada Indonesia pra-kemerdekaan dengan subjek yang berfokus pada tinggalan Hindu-Buddhis. Metode yang digunakan adalah kajian pustaka, baik terbitan terbaru yang relevan maupun terbitan lama yang penting. Ternyata survei fotografi pada arkeologi Indonesia selama periode kolonial berkembang sejak aktifitas arkeologis yang masih dini hingga menjadi program institusi yang sistematis. Kualitas fotografi juga diapresiasi dalam beragam penerapan serta menawarkan manfaat yang substansial, Fotografi menjadi media dokumentasi, pelengkap publikasi, arsip, serta representasi dan substitusi objek. Latar belakang sejarah fotografi dalam konteks arkeologi Indonesia semacam ini menjadikan nilai penting dari foto-foto tersebut sehingga dapat dijadikan fondasi dalam pelestarian untuk masa depan.
10
Alyokshin, Vadim. "On certain terms used in the archaeology of the Central asian southern regions (Neolithic — Early Iron age)." In ntiquities of East Europe, South Asia and South Siberia in the context of connections and interactions within the Eurasian cultural space (new data and concepts). Institute for the History of Material Culture Russian Academy of Sciences, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.31600/978-5-907053-34-2-14-16.
Full textReports on the topic "Archaeology of Europe"
1
Milek, Karen, and Richard Jones, eds. Science in Scottish Archaeology: ScARF Panel Report. Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, September 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.9750/scarf.06.2012.193.
Full textAbstract:
The main recommendations of the panel report can be summarised under four key headings: High quality, high impact research: the importance of archaeological science is reflected in work that explores issues connected to important contemporary topics, including: the demography of, the nature of movement of, and contact between peoples; societal resilience; living on the Atlantic edge of Europe; and coping with environmental and climatic change. A series of large-scale and integrated archaeological science projects are required to stimulate research into these important topics. To engage fully with Science in Scottish Archaeology iv these questions data of sufficient richness is required that is accessible, both within Scotland and internationally. The RCAHMS’ database Canmore provides a model for digital dissemination that should be built on. Integration: Archaeological science should be involved early in the process of archaeological investigation and as a matter of routine. Resultant data needs to be securely stored, made accessible and the research results widely disseminated. Sources of advice and its communication must be developed and promoted to support work in the commercial, academic, research, governmental and 3rd sectors. Knowledge exchange and transfer: knowledge, data and skills need to be routinely transferred and embedded across the archaeological sector. This will enable the archaeological science community to better work together, establishing routes of communication and improving infrastructure. Improvements should be made to communication between different groups including peers, press and the wider public. Mechanisms exist to enable the wider community to engage with, and to feed into, the development of the archaeological and scientific database and to engage with current debates. Projects involving the wider community in data generation should be encouraged and opportunities for public engagement should be pursued through, for example, National Science Week and Scottish Archaeology Month. Networks and forums: A network of specialists should be promoted to aid collaboration, provide access to the best advice, and raise awareness of current work. This would be complemented by creating a series inter-disciplinary working groups, to discuss and articulate archaeological science issues. An online service to match people (i.e. specialist or student) to material (whether e.g. environmental sample, artefactual assemblage, or skeletal assemblage) is also recommended. An annual meeting should also be held at which researchers would be able to promote current and future work, and draw attention to materials available for analysis, and to specialists/students looking to work on particular assemblages or projects. Such meetings could be rolled into a suitable public outreach event.
2
Dalglish, Chris, and Sarah Tarlow, eds. Modern Scotland: Archaeology, the Modern past and the Modern present. Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, September 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.9750/scarf.09.2012.163.
Full textAbstract:
The main recommendations of the panel report can be summarised under five key headings: HUMANITY The Panel recommends recognition that research in this field should be geared towards the development of critical understandings of self and society in the modern world. Archaeological research into the modern past should be ambitious in seeking to contribute to understanding of the major social, economic and environmental developments through which the modern world came into being. Modern-world archaeology can add significantly to knowledge of Scotland’s historical relationships with the rest of the British Isles, Europe and the wider world. Archaeology offers a new perspective on what it has meant to be a modern person and a member of modern society, inhabiting a modern world. MATERIALITY The Panel recommends approaches to research which focus on the materiality of the recent past (i.e. the character of relationships between people and their material world). Archaeology’s contribution to understandings of the modern world lies in its ability to situate, humanise and contextualise broader historical developments. Archaeological research can provide new insights into the modern past by investigating historical trends not as abstract phenomena but as changes to real lives, affecting different localities in different ways. Archaeology can take a long-term perspective on major modern developments, researching their ‘prehistory’ (which often extends back into the Middle Ages) and their material legacy in the present. Archaeology can humanise and contextualise long-term processes and global connections by working outwards from individual life stories, developing biographies of individual artefacts and buildings and evidencing the reciprocity of people, things, places and landscapes. The modern person and modern social relationships were formed in and through material environments and, to understand modern humanity, it is crucial that we understand humanity’s material relationships in the modern world. PERSPECTIVE The Panel recommends the development, realisation and promotion of work which takes a critical perspective on the present from a deeper understanding of the recent past. Research into the modern past provides a critical perspective on the present, uncovering the origins of our current ways of life and of relating to each other and to the world around us. It is important that this relevance is acknowledged, understood, developed and mobilised to connect past, present and future. The material approach of archaeology can enhance understanding, challenge assumptions and develop new and alternative histories. Modern Scotland: Archaeology, the Modern past and the Modern present vi Archaeology can evidence varied experience of social, environmental and economic change in the past. It can consider questions of local distinctiveness and global homogeneity in complex and nuanced ways. It can reveal the hidden histories of those whose ways of life diverged from the historical mainstream. Archaeology can challenge simplistic, essentialist understandings of the recent Scottish past, providing insights into the historical character and interaction of Scottish, British and other identities and ideologies. COLLABORATION The Panel recommends the development of integrated and collaborative research practices. Perhaps above all other periods of the past, the modern past is a field of enquiry where there is great potential benefit in collaboration between different specialist sectors within archaeology, between different disciplines, between Scottish-based researchers and researchers elsewhere in the world and between professionals and the public. The Panel advocates the development of new ways of working involving integrated and collaborative investigation of the modern past. Extending beyond previous modes of inter-disciplinary practice, these new approaches should involve active engagement between different interests developing collaborative responses to common questions and problems. REFLECTION The Panel recommends that a reflexive approach is taken to the archaeology of the modern past, requiring research into the nature of academic, professional and public engagements with the modern past and the development of new reflexive modes of practice. Archaeology investigates the past but it does so from its position in the present. Research should develop a greater understanding of modern-period archaeology as a scholarly pursuit and social practice in the present. Research should provide insights into the ways in which the modern past is presented and represented in particular contexts. Work is required to better evidence popular understandings of and engagements with the modern past and to understand the politics of the recent past, particularly its material aspect. Research should seek to advance knowledge and understanding of the moral and ethical viewpoints held by professionals and members of the public in relation to the archaeology of the recent past. There is a need to critically review public engagement practices in modern-world archaeology and develop new modes of public-professional collaboration and to generate practices through which archaeology can make positive interventions in the world. And there is a need to embed processes of ethical reflection and beneficial action into archaeological practice relating to the modern past.
3
Saville, Alan, and Caroline Wickham-Jones, eds. Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Scotland : Scottish Archaeological Research Framework Panel Report. Society for Antiquaries of Scotland, June 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.9750/scarf.06.2012.163.
Full textAbstract:
Why research Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Scotland? Palaeolithic and Mesolithic archaeology sheds light on the first colonisation and subsequent early inhabitation of Scotland. It is a growing and exciting field where increasing Scottish evidence has been given wider significance in the context of European prehistory. It extends over a long period, which saw great changes, including substantial environmental transformations, and the impact of, and societal response to, climate change. The period as a whole provides the foundation for the human occupation of Scotland and is crucial for understanding prehistoric society, both for Scotland and across North-West Europe. Within the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods there are considerable opportunities for pioneering research. Individual projects can still have a substantial impact and there remain opportunities for pioneering discoveries including cemeteries, domestic and other structures, stratified sites, and for exploring the huge evidential potential of water-logged and underwater sites. Palaeolithic and Mesolithic archaeology also stimulates and draws upon exciting multi-disciplinary collaborations. Panel Task and Remit The panel remit was to review critically the current state of knowledge and consider promising areas of future research into the earliest prehistory of Scotland. This was undertaken with a view to improved understanding of all aspects of the colonization and inhabitation of the country by peoples practising a wholly hunter-fisher-gatherer way of life prior to the advent of farming. In so doing, it was recognised as particularly important that both environmental data (including vegetation, fauna, sea level, and landscape work) and cultural change during this period be evaluated. The resultant report, outlines the different areas of research in which archaeologists interested in early prehistory work, and highlights the research topics to which they aspire. The report is structured by theme: history of investigation; reconstruction of the environment; the nature of the archaeological record; methodologies for recreating the past; and finally, the lifestyles of past people – the latter representing both a statement of current knowledge and the ultimate aim for archaeologists; the goal of all the former sections. The document is reinforced by material on-line which provides further detail and resources. The Palaeolithic and Mesolithic panel report of ScARF is intended as a resource to be utilised, built upon, and kept updated, hopefully by those it has helped inspire and inform as well as those who follow in their footsteps. Future Research The main recommendations of the panel report can be summarized under four key headings: Visibility: Due to the considerable length of time over which sites were formed, and the predominant mobility of the population, early prehistoric remains are to be found right across the landscape, although they often survive as ephemeral traces and in low densities. Therefore, all archaeological work should take into account the expectation of Palaeolithic and Mesolithic ScARF Panel Report iv encountering early prehistoric remains. This applies equally to both commercial and research archaeology, and to amateur activity which often makes the initial discovery. This should not be seen as an obstacle, but as a benefit, and not finding such remains should be cause for question. There is no doubt that important evidence of these periods remains unrecognised in private, public, and commercial collections and there is a strong need for backlog evaluation, proper curation and analysis. The inadequate representation of Palaeolithic and Mesolithic information in existing national and local databases must be addressed. Collaboration: Multi-disciplinary, collaborative, and cross- sector approaches must be encouraged – site prospection, prediction, recognition, and contextualisation are key areas to this end. Reconstructing past environments and their chronological frameworks, and exploring submerged and buried landscapes offer existing examples of fruitful, cross-disciplinary work. Palaeolithic and Mesolithic archaeology has an important place within Quaternary science and the potential for deeply buried remains means that geoarchaeology should have a prominent role. Innovation: Research-led projects are currently making a substantial impact across all aspects of Palaeolithic and Mesolithic archaeology; a funding policy that acknowledges risk and promotes the innovation that these periods demand should be encouraged. The exploration of lesser known areas, work on different types of site, new approaches to artefacts, and the application of novel methodologies should all be promoted when engaging with the challenges of early prehistory. Tackling the ‘big questions’: Archaeologists should engage with the big questions of earliest prehistory in Scotland, including the colonisation of new land, how lifestyles in past societies were organized, the effects of and the responses to environmental change, and the transitions to new modes of life. This should be done through a holistic view of the available data, encompassing all the complexities of interpretation and developing competing and testable models. Scottish data can be used to address many of the currently topical research topics in archaeology, and will provide a springboard to a better understanding of early prehistoric life in Scotland and beyond.
4
Atkinson, Dan, and Alex Hale, eds. From Source to Sea: ScARF Marine and Maritime Panel Report. Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, September 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.9750/scarf.09.2012.126.
Full textAbstract:
The main recommendations of the panel report can be summarised under four headings: 1. From Source to Sea: River systems, from their source to the sea and beyond, should form the focus for research projects, allowing the integration of all archaeological work carried out along their course. Future research should take a holistic view of the marine and maritime historic environment, from inland lakes that feed freshwater river routes, to tidal estuaries and out to the open sea. This view of the landscape/seascape encompasses a very broad range of archaeology and enables connections to be made without the restrictions of geographical or political boundaries. Research strategies, programmes From Source to Sea: ScARF Marine and Maritime Panel Report iii and projects can adopt this approach at multiple levels; from national to site-specific, with the aim of remaining holistic and cross-cutting. 2. Submerged Landscapes: The rising research profile of submerged landscapes has recently been embodied into a European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action; Submerged Prehistoric Archaeology and Landscapes of the Continental Shelf (SPLASHCOS), with exciting proposals for future research. Future work needs to be integrated with wider initiatives such as this on an international scale. Recent projects have begun to demonstrate the research potential for submerged landscapes in and beyond Scotland, as well as the need to collaborate with industrial partners, in order that commercially-created datasets can be accessed and used. More data is required in order to fully model the changing coastline around Scotland and develop predictive models of site survival. Such work is crucial to understanding life in early prehistoric Scotland, and how the earliest communities responded to a changing environment. 3. Marine & Maritime Historic Landscapes: Scotland’s coastal and intertidal zones and maritime hinterland encompass in-shore islands, trans-continental shipping lanes, ports and harbours, and transport infrastructure to intertidal fish-traps, and define understanding and conceptualisation of the liminal zone between the land and the sea. Due to the pervasive nature of the Marine and Maritime historic landscape, a holistic approach should be taken that incorporates evidence from a variety of sources including commercial and research archaeology, local and national societies, off-shore and onshore commercial development; and including studies derived from, but not limited to history, ethnology, cultural studies, folklore and architecture and involving a wide range of recording techniques ranging from photography, laser imaging, and sonar survey through to more orthodox drawn survey and excavation. 4. Collaboration: As is implicit in all the above, multi-disciplinary, collaborative, and cross-sector approaches are essential in order to ensure the capacity to meet the research challenges of the marine and maritime historic environment. There is a need for collaboration across the heritage sector and beyond, into specific areas of industry, science and the arts. Methods of communication amongst the constituent research individuals, institutions and networks should be developed, and dissemination of research results promoted. The formation of research communities, especially virtual centres of excellence, should be encouraged in order to build capacity.
5
Downes, Jane, ed. Chalcolithic and Bronze Age Scotland: ScARF Panel Report. Society for Antiquaries of Scotland, September 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.9750/scarf.09.2012.184.
Full textAbstract:
The main recommendations of the panel report can be summarised under five key headings: Building the Scottish Bronze Age: Narratives should be developed to account for the regional and chronological trends and diversity within Scotland at this time. A chronology Bronze Age Scotland: ScARF Panel Report iv based upon Scottish as well as external evidence, combining absolute dating (and the statistical modelling thereof) with re-examined typologies based on a variety of sources – material cultural, funerary, settlement, and environmental evidence – is required to construct a robust and up to date framework for advancing research. Bronze Age people: How society was structured and demographic questions need to be imaginatively addressed including the degree of mobility (both short and long-distance communication), hierarchy, and the nature of the ‘family’ and the ‘individual’. A range of data and methodologies need to be employed in answering these questions, including harnessing experimental archaeology systematically to inform archaeologists of the practicalities of daily life, work and craft practices. Environmental evidence and climate impact: The opportunity to study the effects of climatic and environmental change on past society is an important feature of this period, as both palaeoenvironmental and archaeological data can be of suitable chronological and spatial resolution to be compared. Palaeoenvironmental work should be more effectively integrated within Bronze Age research, and inter-disciplinary approaches promoted at all stages of research and project design. This should be a two-way process, with environmental science contributing to interpretation of prehistoric societies, and in turn, the value of archaeological data to broader palaeoenvironmental debates emphasised. Through effective collaboration questions such as the nature of settlement and land-use and how people coped with environmental and climate change can be addressed. Artefacts in Context: The Scottish Chalcolithic and Bronze Age provide good evidence for resource exploitation and the use, manufacture and development of technology, with particularly rich evidence for manufacture. Research into these topics requires the application of innovative approaches in combination. This could include biographical approaches to artefacts or places, ethnographic perspectives, and scientific analysis of artefact composition. In order to achieve this there is a need for data collation, robust and sustainable databases and a review of the categories of data. Wider Worlds: Research into the Scottish Bronze Age has a considerable amount to offer other European pasts, with a rich archaeological data set that includes intact settlement deposits, burials and metalwork of every stage of development that has been the subject of a long history of study. Research should operate over different scales of analysis, tracing connections and developments from the local and regional, to the international context. In this way, Scottish Bronze Age studies can contribute to broader questions relating both to the Bronze Age and to human society in general.
6
Hunter, Fraser, and Martin Carruthers. Iron Age Scotland. Society for Antiquaries of Scotland, September 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.9750/scarf.09.2012.193.
Full textAbstract:
The main recommendations of the panel report can be summarised under five key headings: Building blocks: The ultimate aim should be to build rich, detailed and testable narratives situated within a European context, and addressing phenomena from the longue durée to the short-term over international to local scales. Chronological control is essential to this and effective dating strategies are required to enable generation-level analysis. The ‘serendipity factor’ of archaeological work must be enhanced by recognising and getting the most out of information-rich sites as they appear. o There is a pressing need to revisit the archives of excavated sites to extract more information from existing resources, notably through dating programmes targeted at regional sequences – the Western Isles Atlantic roundhouse sequence is an obvious target. o Many areas still lack anything beyond the baldest of settlement sequences, with little understanding of the relations between key site types. There is a need to get at least basic sequences from many more areas, either from sustained regional programmes or targeted sampling exercises. o Much of the methodologically innovative work and new insights have come from long-running research excavations. Such large-scale research projects are an important element in developing new approaches to the Iron Age. Daily life and practice: There remains great potential to improve the understanding of people’s lives in the Iron Age through fresh approaches to, and integration of, existing and newly-excavated data. o House use. Rigorous analysis and innovative approaches, including experimental archaeology, should be employed to get the most out of the understanding of daily life through the strengths of the Scottish record, such as deposits within buildings, organic preservation and waterlogging. o Material culture. Artefact studies have the potential to be far more integral to understandings of Iron Age societies, both from the rich assemblages of the Atlantic area and less-rich lowland finds. Key areas of concern are basic studies of material groups (including the function of everyday items such as stone and bone tools, and the nature of craft processes – iron, copper alloy, bone/antler and shale offer particularly good evidence). Other key topics are: the role of ‘art’ and other forms of decoration and comparative approaches to assemblages to obtain synthetic views of the uses of material culture. o Field to feast. Subsistence practices are a core area of research essential to understanding past society, but different strands of evidence need to be more fully integrated, with a ‘field to feast’ approach, from production to consumption. The working of agricultural systems is poorly understood, from agricultural processes to cooking practices and cuisine: integrated work between different specialisms would assist greatly. There is a need for conceptual as well as practical perspectives – e.g. how were wild resources conceived? o Ritual practice. There has been valuable work in identifying depositional practices, such as deposition of animals or querns, which are thought to relate to house-based ritual practices, but there is great potential for further pattern-spotting, synthesis and interpretation. Iron Age Scotland: ScARF Panel Report v Landscapes and regions: Concepts of ‘region’ or ‘province’, and how they changed over time, need to be critically explored, because they are contentious, poorly defined and highly variable. What did Iron Age people see as their geographical horizons, and how did this change? Attempts to understand the Iron Age landscape require improved, integrated survey methodologies, as existing approaches are inevitably partial. Aspects of the landscape’s physical form and cover should be investigated more fully, in terms of vegetation (known only in outline over most of the country) and sea level change in key areas such as the firths of Moray and Forth. Landscapes beyond settlement merit further work, e.g. the use of the landscape for deposition of objects or people, and what this tells us of contemporary perceptions and beliefs. Concepts of inherited landscapes (how Iron Age communities saw and used this longlived land) and socal resilience to issues such as climate change should be explored more fully. Reconstructing Iron Age societies. The changing structure of society over space and time in this period remains poorly understood. Researchers should interrogate the data for better and more explicitly-expressed understandings of social structures and relations between people. The wider context: Researchers need to engage with the big questions of change on a European level (and beyond). Relationships with neighbouring areas (e.g. England, Ireland) and analogies from other areas (e.g. Scandinavia and the Low Countries) can help inform Scottish studies. Key big topics are: o The nature and effect of the introduction of iron. o The social processes lying behind evidence for movement and contact. o Parallels and differences in social processes and developments. o The changing nature of houses and households over this period, including the role of ‘substantial houses’, from crannogs to brochs, the development and role of complex architecture, and the shift away from roundhouses. o The chronology, nature and meaning of hillforts and other enclosed settlements. o Relationships with the Roman world