Archaeological Ethics

1994

Canadian Journal of Archaeology 32: 135-141, 2008

papers.ssrn.com

Heritage advocates and nations of origin have an impressive and grow-ing array of legal measures to help protect and preserve antiquities: national ownership declarations, export restrictions, and enforcement of these measures by various domestic and international courts and law ...

All our knowledge, all our understanding of our place in the world, is contextual. This simply means that we make sense of things by finding a place for them; we are secure when we find a place for ourselves, and we live by working with the assumption that certain kinds of order in the world around us will continue and can therefore be relied upon. Finding the context of what puzzles us is the purpose of active enquiry; contexts and the clarity they bring do not just happen, they have to be discovered. If archaeology is a particular way of understanding the world then archaeologists must have developed a particular way of dealing with contextual issues. At first this observation seems unremarkable. Archaeology has long concerned itself with the contexts of stratigraphy and association, and the building of contextual relationships of distribution and sequence. Indeed this methodological emphasis upon the context of things distinguishes the work of the archaeologist from that of the antiquarian, collector and the looter. While each of the latter recognizes a value, be it aesthetic or financial, in the isolated object, archaeologists treat the value of objects as realized by their contextual associations. These associations matter to us because they can be used to provide us with a wider frame of reference, a context within which the object gains significance. Context therefore provides a mechanism that moves us from observation to interpretation. It matters because context has the power to transform our observations and to inform our understanding. The material contexts of our discoveries are part of the contemporary body of archaeological materials distributed in museum archives, described in publications, and embedded in visible field monuments and as yet uncovered deposits, yet our interpretive efforts are directed at linking the context of the contemporary archive with a second context, that of past activities, processes and histories. I will argue that building this link is the real work of archaeology. This will introduce us to another contextual issue: the way our understanding of the past, and our demands for support in the preservation and investigation of archaeological materials, can address the contemporary world in which we work. This final context concerns the kinds of practical and intellectual support, understanding and access to the material that should be available to the wider community.

2014

Archaeology is not merely the study of antiquity through the systematic discovery, colleting and documenting of ancient things. It is also the appreciation and interpretation of things and their agency which shed light on the character and dynamics of past (and present) societies.

Sub chapters in 'The discipline of archaeology': What is archaeology?, What archaeologists do and where they work, Avenues of discovery: how archaeological finds are recovered, Archaeological contexts and categories: how finds are classified, Roads to knowlöedge: how archaeological documentation is stored and retrieved, The changing nature of archaeology - between history and anthropology, the humanities and science, Approaches to interpretation,The politics and ethics of archaeology: between ideology, heritage and academia, The future of archaeology. Appendix: definitions of archaeology.

Archaeological Dialogues, 2018

The paper ponders on the object of archaeology, called here 'the archaeological.' It argues that the existence of such an object is a necessary premise of the field and that ultimately it is on this object that the validity of all claims and arguments must rest. The paper suggests that the archaeological be conceived as a cultural phenomenon that consists in being disengaged from the social, an understanding that positions archaeology as a counterpart to the social sciences and the humanities, rather than a member in the same milieu. The first part of the paper focuses on the position of the archaeological with reference to the concepts of 'Nature' and 'Culture' that eventually leads us to a confrontation of archaeological statics with the dynamics of the world. Efforts to justify and understand archaeological statics, consequently, leads to the recognition of a constitutive distinction between buried and non-buried conditions, upon which the differentiation of the archaeological from the social is established.

2009

This course explores how archaeologists make sense of the world from artifacts of the past. Human practices and cultural processes resonate, live within the material traces that surround us in our everyday life. How do archaeologists re-imagine these traces as residues of real people in history rather than imaginary beings and ghosts? How do archaeologists place material objects and spaces in the context of human practices, cultural processes and long-term history? In short, we will read, think and write about archaeological ways of thinking about the world. Archaeology, as a modern discipline, investigates the past through the study of its material remains. This material record is documented and interpreted through various intellectual activities from fieldwork to publication. But archaeologists are usually torn between their work in the field (digging, surveying, drawing, travelling, taking notes) and in their academic environment (processing data, interpreting, publishing). Throughout the semester we will spend some thought on this divided life between the field and discourse, and explore some of the novel attempts have been made to bridge them. Archaeology frequently becomes entangled with our daily lives through its politicized engagement with the past and issues of identity. We will examine various theoretical approaches and historiographic models used in archaeology since its inception in the 19th century, while putting a particular emphasis on the recent developments in the theories and methodologies in archaeology in the last few decades. It is intended to provide a solid theoretical and historigraphic basis for the discipline of archaeology. The first few weeks of the course will be dedicated to discussing the central movements in the discipline such as culture-history, New Archaeology, and contextual archaeology, while the second half deals with more contemporary theoretical paradigms such as gender and sexuality, technology and agency, space, place and landscape, and issues of cultural heritage. Particular archaeological materials, sites, projects will be used in discussing the potentials and disadvantages of various approaches. Archaeological case studies will be drawn mostly from the ancient Western Asian and Mediterranean worlds.

Routledge, 2005

A fine summary of state-of-the-art thinking in archaeology in its time (2005), and still very relevant in 2020. I contributed a couple of entries. This invaluable resource provides an up-to-date and comprehensive survey of key ideas in archaeology and their impact on archaeological thinking and method. Featuring over fifty detailed entries by international experts, the book offers definitions of key terms, explaining their origin and development. Entries also feature guides to further reading and extensive cross-referencing. Subjects covered include: • Thinking about landscape • Cultural evolution • Social archaeology • Gender archaeology • Experimental archaeology • Archaeology of cult and religion • Concepts of time • The Antiquity of Man • Feminist archaeology • Multiregional evolution Archaeology: The Key Concepts is the ideal reference guide for students, teachers and anyone with an interest in archaeology.