#archaeology in the 60s

[chanakakamal]

What happened in archaeology during the 20th century? - Part 2

As mentioned in the previous article, during the time before 1960 in the 20th century, the focus was on methodological improvements in archaeology. From 1960 on, the focus was on theoretical improvements in archaeology. This does not mean that the 1960s marked a clear line between methodological and theoretical development in archaeology. This means the majority of events and concerns in the discipline were slightly different before and after 1960.

What happened in archaeology after 1960s?

From 1960 on, archaeology transformed into a new version of itself. We refer to it as “New Archaeology”. So, the birth of new archaeology is the main thing that happened in archaeology after 1960.

What is New Archaeology?

In new archaeology, the main focus is on studying the cultural processes of past human societies. As you may remember, in the background era of archaeology, the focus was to discover the legendary cities of the past. In the Renaissance era, the focus was to collect antiquities and study the history of antiquity. Then, in the 19th century, the focus was on studying the history of humans and their culture. Again, in the 20th century before 1960, the focus was the same. Then, only after 1960, scholars started to study how human cultures were born, evolved, and changed.

In simple words, before this new archaeology, what archaeologists studied were random and independent events in the past related to humans. But with new archaeology, they studied how those events in history connected with each other. They studied how both intentional and accidental acts of human ancestors have shaped their culture. How did the things that past humans did as well as the things that happened to past humans shape the cultures of past humans? They examined. So, as archaeologists focused on this process of birth and evolution of cultures, we call this processual archaeology.

Read full article on New Archaeology: Processual Archaeology at kamalsjournal.com

Other than the birth of New Archaeology, there were a few important events and trends that occurred after the 1960s, as listed below:

Scholars like Lewis Binford introduced new theories that resulted the emergence of new archaeology

Gordon Childe had introduced his theory of the Neolithic Revolution, explaining how human ancestors domesticated animals and plants. He said that after the domestication of animals and plants, establishing settlements and making pottery took place in order. Archaeology became the scientific discipline to test these theories.

The extensive use of technology to analyse and interpret data

Studies transformed into problem-oriented studies. Scholars began to conduct studies to find answers to research questions.

The studies focused on providing more rational conclusions than ever.

Archaeologists introduced Rescue archaeology, or salvage archaeology, to save archaeological monuments and sites as warfare and development projects were causing huge destruction to them Soon, Archaeological Impact assessments became a necessity before development projects.

In 1970, scholars introduced cultural resource management to protect valuable archaeological sites and monuments. Then, they introduced archaeological heritage management and cultural heritage management too.

So, the new archaeology is an upgrade of archaeology that emerged in the 1960s with better theories and methods, focusing on studying the cultural processes of the human past through material data.

What Happened in Archaeology After 1980?

After 1980, the new archaeology was questioned, and a new version emerged, named post-processual archaeology. Scholars like Ian Hodder introduced new theories for archaeology. This age was literally a period of theoretical reform in archaeology. In order to understand archaeology in this age, the characteristics of new archaeology and post-processual archaeology can be compared.

The new archaeology focused on quantitative results. Post-processual archaeology focused on qualitative results.

The new archaeology was pessimistic. Post-processual archaeology was optimistic. In new archaeology, it was believed that past human cultures were never able to be reconstructed with the limited data found in archaeology. In post-processual archaeology, the approach was optimistic regarding the matter.

New archaeology focused on the processes that were behind creating antiquities. Post-processual archaeology focuses on the culture behind antiquities.

The new archaeology focused on explaining past landscapes as cultural processes. Post-processual archaeology focuses on cultural or cognitive aspects of past human beings.

New archaeology considered that past incidents happened that way because of external factors such as environmental conditions, and things only changed when the environment changed. But post-processual archaeology considers the choices made by humans in the formation of history.

New archaeology looked into the past from the same point of view as we look into the present. But post-processual archaeology looked at the past from different perspectives.

New archaeology tried to understand the past as patterns of social, economic, and political anomalies, but post-processual archaeology tries to understand the past as a collection of individual anomalies. As an example, in new archaeology, it will be said that the Stone Age is followed by the Bronze Age, and the Bronze Age is followed by the Iron Age as a pattern, with some minor exceptions, due to the nature of the impact from the environment. But, in post-processual archaeology, it will be specific with the place and time where and when the Stone Age was followed by which, either bronze, copper, or iron, considering the individuality of incidents and trends that occurred in the history of mankind due to the cognition of mankind, not the environment.

Read full article on Post-Processual Archaeology at kamalsjournal.com

Summary

As discussed above, the discipline of archaeology, which had already emerged in the 19th century, was developed further as a science in the 20th century. In the first six decades of the 20th century, the use of technology extensively developed archaeology as a science in practical ways, such as chemical dating methods.

Then, in the 1960s, the theoretical evolution of archaeology took place. Rather than explaining the story behind antiquities, the past human cultural process was studied with the use of antiquities, marking the first origin of the form of archaeology we have today, which is ‘studying through material data’. And also, archaeological heritage management was introduced to have standards for dealing with archaeologically important heritage.

Then, in the 1980s, with post-processual archaeology, the approach to archaeological studies changed. Earlier, mankind’s cognition was neglected when recreating the past through material remains. There, the environment was considered the force of evolution. Simply put, it said that human culture had changed due to environmental changes. But, in post-processual archaeology, it was said that human culture changed mainly due to the intelligence humans had. As humans, we could choose whatever we wanted with our intelligence. Further, it emphasised that the past is not a pattern but a collection of various occurrences that happened at various times and in various places individually.

As of today, the archaeology we refer to is this post-processual archaeology. So, this is the long process of the origin of archaeology. However, there is an ongoing, never-ending debate about processual archaeology vs. post-processual archaeology.

At this point, if you read all seven articles, I am sure you probably get the same image in your head as I do when I hear “History of Archaeology”. And now, most probably, you have your own idea of the origin of archaeology too.

[enyasaints]

Sexual Assault Legal Fund

Unfortunately I have had no traction on my Gofundme. It is discouraging. I have many of needs and I don’t know where to start. I really hope the people who can help see me.

For direct help:

PP: enyasaints@gmail.com

[tarantula-hawk-wasp]

Indiana Jones and the academic beef

[visenyaism]

Imo canon aemond has no interest in Helaena beyond the fact that he deserves to be the first born and thus she should belong to him. She is just an object.

like that’s his sister and he clearly cares about her a little but the main thing for him really does seem to be that it’s not fair that aegon gets given her because it’s also not fair he’s going to get given the crown when aemond thinks it should be him. Aemond’s “if we were betrothed i would treat her well as befits our house” to aegon in the show doesn’t read as much as an “i care about helaena’s specific well being” as it does an “i would be a better king than you and would respect the trappings of power which includes our sister” yknow. like that didn’t read to me as romantic interest at all

[lasagras]

Icelandic archaeology culture is having beef with one of our former presidents not for political reasons but because of his lack of preciseness in archaeological records

[nyx5z]

[starswallowingsea]

Just had the most baffling interaction

[lunalight-001]

After putting in a lot of effort into this, I’m finally done making and fully prepared to do what I see girls of my age do online just to earn,I sure hope all my hard work don’t go to waste.

[gaykarstaagforever]

My favorite episode of Time Team was the one where the trench they dug suddenly filled up with blood and a tentacle lashed out of it and grabbed Carenza. And Phil was right there but he didn't react to her screams for like a full 20 seconds because he was excited about a thumb-sized piece of knapped flint he found in his boot.

[antotheethnographer]

Quizás deberíamos armar una red de papers similar pero en castellano. No sé lo suficiente de egiptología, pero tiro la idea por si a alguien más le interesa.

Tenemos que ganar la calle o perdemos contra los aliens ancestrales.

Egyptology tumblr. Help. One of my coworkers at a construction site knows I'm an archaeologist and asked if I knew of Graham Hancock. We had an... interesting discussion. He seems reasonable and open to considering different ideas, but he is *convinced* there are no records of the Giza Pyramids being built and thinks that their construction is still a mystery. I told him otherwise, and he seemed legitimately interested if I could find sources and challenged me to do so. @somecunttookmyurl @thatlittleegyptologist @rudjedet and anyone else who might be able to help, if you happen to have sources or resources about construction of the pyramids. Please share if you're able/have the time. I can probably find some stuff on my own but if anyone has sources on hand that would be amazing.

[treecakes]

sorry i’m just sitting here waiting for an exam to open up

[tenth-sentence]

After a long day in the library I found it, in a dry book written for academic readership in 1961.

"Humankind: A Hopeful History" - Rutger Bregman

[probablyasocialecologist]

During the first six months of the current war on Gaza, the Israeli military destroyed about 60 percent of the Strip’s cultural heritage sites and monuments. This toll includes the Bronze Age settlement of Tell el-‘Ajjul, the St. Hilarion monastery founded nearly 1,700 years ago, and Pasha’s Palace built in the 13th century and used recently as an archaeological museum. According to many Palestinian and civil rights organizations, this destruction is deliberate. I’m an archaeologist living in the West Bank who has written about cultural heritage destruction and antiquities looting. I serve as the secretary general of the International Council on Monuments and Sites–Palestine and of the Society for Palestinian Archaeology. Over 34 years, I have conducted several research projects and interviewed hundreds of Palestinians involved in illegal looting, trading, and trafficking of ancient objects. The losses unfolding now in Palestine, however, are unprecedented in scale and speed. International agreements enshrine the protection of cultural heritage and recognize its destruction as a war crime. But agencies responsible for policing these agreements have been conspicuously and inexcusably absent from the current conflict. No doubt protecting historical monuments and archaeological sites is challenging amid a war, and humanitarian efforts should prioritize saving lives. Yet UNESCO and other heritage organizations have tools and tactics to deter the destruction of cultural assets in conflict zones. Why, then, are these organizations neglecting to protect cultural heritage in Palestine?

[...]

According to Resolution 242, passed by the United Nations Security Council in 1967, the Palestinian territories, which include the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, are under occupation. As the occupying power, Israel must take necessary measures to safeguard and protect the cultural and natural heritage of the Palestinian territories. During its 2023–2024 assault on Gaza, Israel has been credibly accused of doing the opposite: systematically destroying Gaza’s cultural heritage as part of its broader genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. As of February, Israeli forces have destroyed at least 200 archaeological sites and buildings of cultural and historical significance in the Gaza Strip, according to a report from the Palestinian Ministry of Culture.

6 June 2024

[goldentangerines]

day 2 of the archaeology conference: i was complimented on my second cunty business outfit of the weekend, i was complimented on my work and work ethic, and i was complimented by a nationwide medieval archaeology expert on a contribution i made to his panel. on another panel i asked a question about the findings of an excavation in türkiye and the contributor realized her team made a major mistake in documenting and therefore made an error in the floor plan some 5ish years ago. also i got invited to a private tour of a local monument that's been closed to the public for more than 25 years. my ego will inflate to never-seen-before sizes

i'm on an archaeology conference this weekend and today (the first day of the conference) i sat through 2½ hours of highly interesting panels from professors all over the world before i realized all i had in my head was sugar by sleep token

[blueiscoool]

‘Rare’ 400-Year-Old Tomb Found in China

For centuries, the pale blue doors of an imposing stone tomb remained largely shut. When archaeologists in China finally walked in, they found themselves surrounded by a “rare” and elaborate interior.

Archaeologists excavated the ancient stone tomb in Xinfu District ahead of highway construction, Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology said in a March 6 news release shared via a post on Weibo.

The tomb was about 400 years old, dating to the Ming dynasty, and well-preserved, archaeologists said. The roughly 83-foot-long grave was made up of a sloping passageway, main burial chamber and smaller back chamber.

The 400-year-old tomb was sealed with a stone gatehouse and set of double doors, a photo shows.

Inside the main burial chamber, archaeologists found two wooden coffins. The painted coffins were decorated with gold diamonds, leaves, flowers and other designs. Several pottery jars containing grain, oil or other liquids were also found in the room.

The final back chamber held several pieces of wooden furniture including altars, tables and chairs, the institute said. Most of the furniture was collapsed and broken, photos show.

Archaeologists also found “writing tools such as inkstones, Chinese calligraphy brush pens, and pen holders” in the back chamber, according to an article from the China Daily, a state-controlled news outlet.

Several inscriptions on the coffins and walls helped researchers identify the deceased as a man who lived between 1533 and 1588, the institute said.

Because of the tomb’s high-quality artifacts and preservation, archaeologists described the grave as “rare” and elaborate.

Archaeologists have excavated over 60 tombs ahead of the highway construction projects, the institute said.

Xinfu District is in Shanxi Province and about 300 miles southwest of Beijing.