Time and Archaeological Event

Lucas, Gavin

doi:10.1017/s095977430800005x

Cited by 54 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These ideas correspond well with contemporary conceptualisations in archaeology of the relationships between individual agency within socio-ecological systems (McGlade, 1995;Bintliff, 2008, p. 160), facilitating the application of simulation methods in this area, but it also meshes ideas associated with archaeological formation that view the record as being perpetually in a state of becoming (e.g. Ascher, 1961;Schiffer, 1976;Binford, 1981;Bailey, 1983;Lucas, 2008; see also Pred, 1984).…”

Section: The Common Threads Of Formation and Simulationsupporting

confidence: 69%

Weaving the Common Threads of Simulation and Formation studies in Archaeology

Davies¹

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer simulation is a tool increasingly used by archaeologists to build theories about past human activity; however, simulation has had a limited role theorising about the relationship between past behaviours and the formation of observed patterning in the material record. This paper visits the argument for using simulation as a means of addressing the gap that exists between archaeological interpretations of past behaviours and their physical residues. It is argued that simulation is used for much the same reason that archaeologists use ethnographic or experimental studies, and that computational models can help to address some of the practical limitations of these approaches to record formation. A case study from arid Australia, examining the effects of episodic surface erosion on the visibility of the record, shows how simple, generative simulations, grounded in formational logic, can be used to compare different explanatory mechanisms and suggest tests of the archaeological record itself.

show abstract

Section: The Common Threads Of Formation and Simulationsupporting

confidence: 69%

Weaving the Common Threads of Simulation and Formation studies in Archaeology

Davies¹

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Barad 2007; Bennett 2010; Miller 2010; Whitmore 2014). It is also frequently encountered in social and historical disciplines (Mahoney 2000; Tilly 1988; 1994) and in archaeology (Hegmon, Howard, O'Hara & Peeples 2016: 173‐4; Hodder 2012: 88‐112; Lucas 2008).…”

Section: Convergent Trajectories and Cumulative Directionality In Culmentioning

confidence: 99%

The logics of enclosure: deep‐time trajectories in the spread of land tenure boundaries in late prehistoric northern Europe

Løvschal

2020

Royal Anthropological Inst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasive schemes involving the erection of land tenure boundaries are currently spreading quickly across vast areas throughout the globe, turning former unfenced forests and grasslands into closed‐off parcels. These processes pose intriguing questions about the deep history of colonizing assemblages consisting of particular tenure practices, temporalities, and technologies, as well as their potential long‐term repercussions. This article expands the temporal horizon applied to human‐nonhuman configurations, endeavouring to focus beyond the ethnographic present or the event on trajectories as a particular spatial and temporal logic of fencing and the virtuality that ensues. It explores the earliest large‐scale spread of land tenure boundaries across northern Europe, a process which occurred between the seventeenth and fifth centuries BCE, several millennia after Neolithization. Significant ebbs and flows in this process demonstrate how fencing exerts pressure on the future, a conspiring of forces and potentialities regarding what may or may not turn into long‐term paths towards ever‐increasing or enduring boundaries. By applying a 2,000‐year timespan to the study of material ontologies, this article explores new interfaces between archaeology and new materialism which reveal the presence of formative yet dynamic processes and quasi‐paths.

show abstract

“…Issues of the micro and macro scale permeate and polarize archaeological investigation (for recent discussion see Beaudry 2005;Robb and Pauketat 2013;Voss 2008). In recent years, numerous archaeologists have turned to studying past events in an effort to move from considerations of protracted evolutionary processes to those of punctuated change occurring in historical events (Beck et al 2007;Bolender 2010;Gilmore and O'Donoughue 2015;Lucas 2008). Many of these approaches draw upon the influential definition of events by historian William Sewell (2005, 227), who proposes that events are 'sequences of occurrences that result in transformations of structures', with these occurrences being mostly of relatively short duration (Lucas 2012, 182).…”

Section: Assemblages Of Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Assemblages of practice. A conceptual framework for exploring human–thing relations in archaeology

Antczak¹,

Beaudry²

2019

Arch. Dial.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we propose the conceptual framework of the assemblage of practice as an effective middlerange heuristic tool that bridges deep theory and the data available to archaeologists. Our framework foregrounds vibrant things as opposed to static objects, and sympathetically articulates the current concepts of entanglement, correspondence and assemblage. To us an assemblage of practice is a dynamic gathering of corresponding things entangled through situated daily and eventful human practice. Once reassembled by comprehensively and critically marshalling all the evidentiary lines available to archaeologists today, the assemblage of practice becomes a powerful analytical tool that illuminates changes, continuities and transformations in human-thing entanglements, and not only their impacts on local and short-term sociocultural developments, but also their repercussions on phenomena of much larger spatiotemporal scale. Our goal is to present archaeologists with a pluralistic, integrative and evolving middle-range framework that pays close attention to terminological precision and theoretical clarity and is conceptually accessible and widely applicable.

show abstract

Time and Archaeological Event

Cited by 54 publications

References 8 publications

Weaving the Common Threads of Simulation and Formation studies in Archaeology

Weaving the Common Threads of Simulation and Formation studies in Archaeology

The logics of enclosure: deep‐time trajectories in the spread of land tenure boundaries in late prehistoric northern Europe

Assemblages of practice. A conceptual framework for exploring human–thing relations in archaeology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About