Two stereotype views exist with respect to recent developments in Dutch archaeology. The first holds that the confrontation with New Archaeology in 1968/69 signalled the beginning of an entirely new period in Dutch archaeology. At that point, Dutch archaeologists were first involved in international theoretical discussions, which they have more or less followed ever since. This resulted in the emergence of counterparts in Dutch archaeology of New (or processual) Archaeology, and later of post-processual approaches.
I would like to thank Michel Christol, John Creighton, Louise Revell and Peter Wells for their stimulating comments on the two articles under discussion by Greg Woolf and myself. Since Christol and Wells mainly confine themselves to remarks on the cultural changes in Interior Gaul, my reply will focus on Revell and Creighton's critical comments on my paper. The most provoking of these, to me, was the term ‘story-telling’, as used by Revell. It is not, on first thoughts, a desirable designation for articles with a certain theoretical ambition. After all, the term evokes associations with the narrative traditions of the ‘pre-theoretical’ phase of Roman archaeology (Laurence 2001). This kind of story-telling does not belong in a theoretical journal such asArchaeological dialogues.
This paper sets out to examine issues of continuity and change in the social hierarchies of the peoples of the Gallic interior, between the late Iron Age and the early Roman period. This part of the empire is one in which we might reasonably expect to find substantial continuity of social structure. Many scholars have argued that this is indeed the case, notwithstanding the evident changes in material culture. This paper argues that the opposite was true. Apparent similarities, I suggest, reinforced by the ways we have studied provincial cultures, have masked dramatic changes in the basis of social power. That conclusion has implications for other provincial societies, and for Roman imperialism in general.
editorialJ o s B a z e l m a n s , P e t e r v a n D o m m e l e n , J a n K o l e n a n d J a n S l o f s t r a U U t C t i perspectives on contemporary archaeology An editorial statementInternational debate in archaeology since the early 1960s may be said to have an ambiguous nature. On the one hand, 'new' and 'fresh' orientations and perspectives have been proposed one after another at an increasing rate. The wide variety of processual, marxist, contextual, structuralist archaeologies, which are often fundamentally at odds and yet may be found together even in one single publication, undeniably demonstrates the pluralist character of contemporary archaeology. Continental European archaeology is moreover characterized by a striking regional diversity of clearly distinct traditions, each with its own specific academic interests and particular ways of practizing and theorizing on archaeology. Although none of these regional traditions is entirely homogenous or without internal discussions, the regional aspect represents a significant unifying feature in each case. On the other hand, the dominant position of Anglo-American archaeology in international debate, abundantly illustrated by recent surveys of archaeological practice and thought in various regions and countries (Trigger and Glover 1981;Vasicek and Malina 1990;Hodder 1991a), has generally narrowed the scope of themes addressed: both the New Archaeology as well as the subsequent processual and post-processual perspectives have tended to focus on particular themes while ignoring other matters which were of concern to regional archaeologies. Most continental archaeologies have moreover explicitly tended to •withdraw from international debate or have only attended from a distance (cf. Cleuziou et al. 1991, 91-92).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.