Archaeology’s quest for a seat at the high table of anthropology

Lyman, R. Lee

doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2006.11.003

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This concern is not a new one, it was expressed at least 40 years ago (e.g., Deetz, 1970;Ford, 1973;Fritz, 1973) and has risen to prominence again (Little and Zimmerman, 2010;Sabloff, 2008;Stottman, 2011). In particular, it appears that our long desire to join our cultural anthropology colleagues at their -high table‖ may have been misplaced (Boyer, 2011;Lyman, 2007;Schiffer, 2011). An area of interdisciplinary scholarship where we may find good articulation is with environmental sciences and human ecology, especially concerning the issues of consumerism and sustainability (Camp et al, 2011;Guttman-Bond, 2010;Majewski and Schiffer, 2001;Rathje 2001;Rathje et al, 2004;Rogers, 2004;Smith, 2010).…”

Section: Search For Relevance Of Archaeology To Contemporary Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The recycling of material culture today and during the Paleolithic

Amick

2015

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Archaeologists are being increasingly challenged to apply their methods and perspectives to address contemporary global concerns, such as material consumption and recycling. The archaeological investigation of recycling can contribute to understanding its behavioral causes and situational contexts because it can reveal systematic patterning in its temporal, spatial, and formal dimensions. In this paper, I review some of the archaeological evidence of artifact recycling and a few lessons drawn from those studies, including general patterns in lithic recycling behavior and needs to address ambiguity in the definition of recycling, compounding factors of equifinality in lithic reduction, and recognizing opportunism in recycling behavior. This evidence is also used to consider the behavioral and environmental circumstances of patterned recycling in the broader study of material culture and human behavior. It is argued that archaeological studies can offer useful contributions to such universal theories and that archaeological explanations about recycling behavior would benefit from greater integration with the larger body of historical and social science studies on this topic.

show abstract

Section: Search For Relevance Of Archaeology To Contemporary Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The recycling of material culture today and during the Paleolithic

Amick

2015

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is certainly not the case. But it is true that the path for such theory building and reconstructions must pass through the mundane world of everything things (Lyman 2007). Does this path, however, keep us from sitting at the "high table" (Lyman 2007) of social theorists whether they are sociologists, cultural anthropologists, or historians?…”

Section: Does Archaeological Theory Really Matter?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Archaeological Theory and Snake-Oil Peddling: The Role of Ethnoarchaeology in Archaeology

Skibo¹

2009

Ethnoarchaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By the 1970s ethnoarchaeology took on a more central role in archaeological method and theory. During that era some of the classic ethnoarchaeological projects took place across the globe, all with the general aim of making archaeology more anthropological. Since that time, there have been an increasing number of ethnoarchaeological projects serving not just the original Processual Archaeology goals but also the concerns of an expanding archaeological theory. Despite this increase in ethnoarchaeology, there is a general belief that it does little to serve the concerns of those doing "real archaeology, " that is excavating and making inferences about past activity. Through an analysis of citations in American Antiquity, I assess how ethnoarchaeological work has been used by prehistorians and whether there truly is a disjunction between ethnoarchaeological research and prehistoric reconstructions. In doing so, I explore the role of ethnoarchaeology in theory building, whether archaeological theory really matters, and the most productive way to employ ethnoarchaeological research. It is argued that archaeological theories come and go like snake-oil cures but those that last focus on the relationships between people and material culture. One such theory, a performance-based approach, is offered and contrasted with agency and practice theories.

show abstract

“…Ecologists and anthropologists also collaborate on research topics ranging from deforestation to fishing communities (McCay 1978, Sussman 1994). Archeology is a subfield of anthropology (Lyman 2007), yet interdisciplinary ecological and archeological studies are rare. Ecologists can likely benefit from combining efforts with archeologists to conduct joint surveys because this collaboration may maximize research outputs while simultaneously addressing ecological and archeological research objectives.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extracting ecological metrics from archeological surveys of shipwrecks using submersible video and laser‐line scanning

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological metrics derived from habitat surveys can provide information necessary to understand population, community, and ecosystem processes. Here, we present a case study on the feasibility of extracting ecological metrics from archeological studies of shipwrecks. Even though shipwrecks that are the focus of archeological surveys also form habitat for diverse flora and fauna, shipwrecks are often studied separately by archeologists and ecologists. Conducting joint archeological and ecological surveys promises to maximize research resources and outputs, yet this cross-disciplinary approach is rare. Here, we test the feasibility of extracting ecological metrics from archeological surveys of two historically significant and deep (200 m) shipwrecks, the German U-boat U-576 and the Nicaraguan freighter SS Bluefields, which sank in close proximity to one another on the continental shelf of North Carolina, USA during World War II. First, we assessed fish density, community composition, behavior, and spatial distribution on these shipwrecks using video and laser-line scanning data collected from human-occupied submersibles during archeological surveys. Second, we examined the ecological benefits and biases of pairing laser-line scanning and video surveys designed for archeological specifications. Our approach allowed us to pinpoint locations of fish around the shipwrecks and to identify these fish to fine taxonomic levels. The extracted ecological data revealed that both shipwrecks hosted high densities (U-576 38.2 AE 4.0; SS Bluefields 32.0 AE 18.0 per along-ship transect) of demersal fishes, including grouper species, and that fish concentrated around high-relief shipwreck features. More broadly, our findings demonstrate the utility and benefits of collecting multipurpose and cross-disciplinary data and provide a proof-of-concept for conducting joint archeological and ecological studies.

show abstract

Archaeology’s quest for a seat at the high table of anthropology

Cited by 16 publications

References 62 publications

The recycling of material culture today and during the Paleolithic

The recycling of material culture today and during the Paleolithic

Archaeological Theory and Snake-Oil Peddling: The Role of Ethnoarchaeology in Archaeology

Extracting ecological metrics from archeological surveys of shipwrecks using submersible video and laser‐line scanning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About