Archaeologies of flow: Water and the landscapes of Southern India past, present, and future

Morrison, Kathleen D.

doi:10.1179/2042458215y.0000000033

Cited by 35 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…), and work like hers has inspired a new “Usable Pasts Forum” as a regular feature of the African Archaeological Review (Ogundiran ). In a similar vein, Kathleen Morrison () makes a case for how richly contextualized material histories can inform South Asian resource management strategies in the present and future. Jeremy Sabloff () has made an impassioned case for what he argues should be an “action archaeology” based on such work.…”

Section: To Whom Are We Accountable?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assembling “Effective Archaeologies” toward Equitable Futures

Stahl

2020

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An urgency compels us to engage how archaeology relates to contemporary situations and future dilemmas as citizens anxiously contemplate their futures. We see “crowd‐sourced” efforts to define pressing questions. A welter of theoretical approaches promises new insight into our relationally configured worlds. We couple awareness of the situated character of knowledge with a commitment to its empirical grounding. In light of this contemporary frame, I explore principles of an “effective archaeology” that imagines its “impacts” beyond narrow “uses.” By attending to how we make facts, archives, and narratives; by placing Western knowledge in productive dialogue with knowledge grounded in other epistemologies; and by embracing a disciplinary responsibility to expand and enlarge imaginings of futures through evidentially robust and critically engaged practice, effective archaeologies hold promise to build toward more equitable futures. [archaeology, epistemology, ontology, knowledge production, collaboration]

show abstract

Section: To Whom Are We Accountable?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assembling “Effective Archaeologies” toward Equitable Futures

Stahl

2020

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasingly, archaeologists are engaging in future‐orientated discourses that situate the study of long‐term, human‐environmental interactions and ancient management and mismanagement practices as critical for assessing future resource sustainability and conservation‐management practices (Barton et al. ; Chase and Chase ; Lambrides and Weisler ; Morrison ; Pikirayi et al. ; Rick et al.…”

Section: Environmental Management Resilience and Sustainable Futuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropological Archaeology in 2016: Cooperation and Collaborations in Archaeological Research and Practice

Halperin

2017

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ideas of collaboration and cooperation are often implicit, taken-for-granted elements in archaeological models and theorizing. Overshadowed by a growing archaeological preoccupation with warfare, violence, conflict, and crisis, cooperative acts and collaborative dispositions appear to lack the same emotional resonance and changestimulating properties that attract archaeological attention. Nonetheless, many archaeological publications in 2016 directly take on notions of collaboration in thinking about the past and our roles as archaeologists and as citizens of the future. This review underscores the significance of thinking about collaboration and cooperation as ambiguous, ambivalent, multiscalar, and dynamic. At issue is not just the creation of community but also of getting things done and, of course, celebrating, revising, or reworking the intended or unintended consequences of those actions over the generations. [archaeology, collaboration, cooperation] RESUMEN Las ideas de colaboración y cooperación son a menudo elementos implícitos, que se dan por sentados en los modelos y teorización arqueológicos. Opacados por una creciente preocupación arqueológica por la guerra, la violencia, el conflicto, y la crisis, a los actos cooperativos y disposiciones colaborativas parecen faltarles la misma resonancia emocional y propiedades estimulantes de cambio que atraen la atención arqueológica. No obstante, muchas publicaciones arqueológicas en 2016 empiezan directamente a tratar las nociones de colaboración, reflexionando acerca del pasado y nuestros roles como arqueólogos y como ciudadanos del futuro. Esta revisión enfatiza la importancia de considerar la colaboración y cooperación como ambiguas, ambivalentes, de múltiples escalas, y dinámicas. En cuestión no sólo está la creación de comunidad, sino también el lograr que se hagan las cosas, y por supuesto, celebrar, revisar, o rehacer las consecuencias planeadas o no planeadas de esas acciones sobre generaciones. [arqueología, colaboración, cooperación]

show abstract

“…In one sense, archaeologists have always studied infrastructure. We could hardly say the discipline has ignored things like roads, aqueducts, field systems, or canals over the years (Morrison 2015). But as a category of theoretical analysis, infrastructure has to date only had limited purchase within archaeological circles.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an Archaeological Theory of Infrastructure

Wilkinson

2018

J Archaeol Method Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infrastructure makes up a considerable portion of the material culture that archaeologists study. Whether measured in terms of spatial extension or just sheer mass, infrastructural entities are often among the biggest artifacts that archaeologists encounter in the field. Yet there is no overarching theoretical framework for the archaeological study of infrastructure, and its different varieties tend to be treated in a rather piecemeal fashion. This article therefore seeks to lay some foundations for a more theoretically unified approach to infrastructure within the discipline. It offers a general definition or infrastructure, as well as a basic typology. The typology presented is fourfold, encompassing (1) static infrastructure (e.g., terraces, harbors and storehouses), (2) circulatory infrastructure (e.g., highways, canals, aqueducts, and sewers), (3) bounding infrastructure (e.g., palisades, ditches, and corrals), and (4) signaling infrastructure (e.g., lighthouses and beacons). By analogy with more heavily theorized categories such as urbanism, it is suggested that infrastructure should be a topic of global comparative analysis within archaeology and its allied disciplines.

show abstract

Archaeologies of flow: Water and the landscapes of Southern India past, present, and future

Cited by 35 publications

References 38 publications

Assembling “Effective Archaeologies” toward Equitable Futures

Assembling “Effective Archaeologies” toward Equitable Futures

Anthropological Archaeology in 2016: Cooperation and Collaborations in Archaeological Research and Practice

Towards an Archaeological Theory of Infrastructure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About