Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenor:
-
Reuben Thorpe
(University College London)
- Discussant:
-
Chris Cumberpatch
- Location:
- Wills G25
- Start time:
- 18 December, 2010 at
Time zone: Europe/London
- Session slots:
- 1
Short Abstract:
This session will focus on theory and methods that aim to tease out social process and social/physical mechanics that lie behind issues of site formation, residuality, redeposition and transformation.
Long Abstract:
The aim of this session will be to focus on a branch of archaeological theory and practice, emerging in the UK, that is focusing on understandings of social processes and wider social mechanics through a re-examination of site formation, assemblage formation, taphonomy, residuality, deposit and assemblage re-working, re-deposition and transformation. This is an area of study that, remarkably, over the last quarter of a century has had little sustained investment of time or joined-up thinking despite promising starts in the 1970s and 1980s (Adams 1987; Bradley & Fulford 1980; Brown 1985; Crummy & Terry 1979; Evans & Millett 1992; Fulford & Peacock 1984; Millett 1979; Moorhouse 1986; Orton 1975; Orton & Orton 1975; Schiffer 1972; Sullivan 1989). While much of this early research was successful in defining and problematising phenomena in archaeological sequences, which bore directly on the inference potential of deposits and structures, chronologies and type series, newer approaches are directed at addressing what defined instances of complex formation can tell us about everyday practices in the past, rather than the limitations of the evidence for dating purposes or complete faunal assembalges, and allow us to draw inferences about the social processes that lead to complex deposition, re-working, re-deposition, something that is simply not addressed in the majority of contemporary archaeological theory and practice.
Accepted papers:
Session 1Paper short abstract:
This paper argues for a quantum unit of past. Employment of this concept in real-time field archaeology forces on the archaeologist a non-linear, dynamic role in mapping the tolerance of the information universe which we call the past.
Paper long abstract:
In 1987 at Bradford TAG a revolution was called for in placing formation processes at the centre of both field investigation and conceptual ideas of archaeological entities. This revolution has not yet been televised. Archaeological theory-time has passed slowly. Even so, it may be worth pushing towards the next boundary: the quantumisation of archaeological entities and process. In theory and in practice this requires the creation of a unit of past, of a theorisation of archaeological time and the re-positioning of the archaeologist in time. It requires archaeologists to complete the subjectivisation of their practice; it requires them to conduct the single scientific experiment that would justify their claim to being primary witnesses to and custodians of the past. This is not idle fancy. It is neither obscure nor conceptually complex. Nor is it post-processual mutton dressed as lamb. It is the start of the next revolution. But don't bother turning your television on just yet.
Paper short abstract:
This paper discusses how a contextualised taphonomic approach to faunal remains allows us to investigate moments of transition and their associated social meanings and concepts.
Paper long abstract:
Excavation is the life blood of archaeology with a great deal of time and effort engaged in the digging and recording of sites. Individual stratagraphic contexts are indentified, planned and documented, their finds bagged and tagged. Yet when it comes to interpreting these finds we could argue that much of that effort has been wasted. This is because the majority of finds are discussed and interpreted in large, artificially imposed, chronological phases. Regarding faunal remains this is, in part, necessary due to the methodologies employed to investigate the traditional economic questions associated with zooarchaeology. However, when discussing social issues this supra-biographical approach often leads to meta-level interpretations.
To move towards a social zooarchaeology it is necessary to focus on the individual. Rather then asking 'what does this (artificially imposed) deposit type mean', we should ask 'what does this individual deposit mean'. This paper will draw on methodologies such as the chaîne opératoire, as well as the work of Schiffer (1983; 1987) and a taphonomic approach to the archaeological record, to suggest that a life history approach to individual faunal deposits can inform on social process. By examining the life history of faunal remains we view snapshots of the transformations that lead from a living animal to a deposit of remains. It is during these transformations that the embodied concepts society or individuals give animals and their remains change. Therefore, by studying these faunal remains we are also studying changing social concepts.
Paper short abstract:
This paper argues that getting at the processes behind formation requires interpretive frameworks that are responsive/contingent to/on sequence/space. I will refer to Beirut using Integrated interpretive Stratigraphic Analysis show how nuanced interpretations of past life can be derived.
Paper long abstract:
If site formation processes and deposit status elude us at the immediate point of excavation, we are able to identify and distinguish primary and secondary relationships of units of stratigraphy. This, however, relies on understanding that a context is not defined just (or even) by what it contains but also by what it does and how it articulates with other contexts in a sequence. This point is important, as it is a long way from much common contemporary practice of recording where interpretation often takes the form of a single word such as "cut, fill, dump". We are able, on site, and in post-excavation to think in more sophisticated ways about site formation by conceiving of stratigraphy in terms of dynamic processes. This paper will seek to examine the use of interpretive chains, or strings, as an aid both in excavation and post-excavation to teasing out the social aspect to and the dynamic of site formation.
Paper short abstract:
This paper brings together the technical study of site formation processes (particularly using ceramic analysis) with social interpretations of depositional practice, arguing that deposition plays a role in constructing 'the social'. This is illustrated using a case study from mid-Saxon Southampton.
Paper long abstract:
It is a quirk of archaeology that the processes of site formation are rarely
contextualised from a social perspective. Often deposits are uncritically
assigned as consisting of 'rubbish' or, if slightly unusual, being somehow
'special'. In this paper I argue that all of these rubbish deposits can be considered as active in the assembling of the 'social' in a particular physical and temporal context.
This will be illustrated through the use of a case study from Hamwic
(mid-Saxon Southampton) where there have been large scale, open area
excavations over several decades and where there have been some pioneering
studies into site formation processes. These have, until now, largely been
divorced from social interpretations of the town. The study will principally
use data from ceramic analysis, such as fragmentation analysis and cross-fit
analysis. Rather than being considered a terminal point in an objects
biography I will consider deposition as a transitional point in an artefacts
life. Whilst some material is middened, meaning that it potentially finds a
secondary use as manure, I argue that even that waste discarded as 'useless'
has a role in constructing the social life of the settlement.
By considering the intersection between the biography of the artefacts within features and of the features themselves I intend to demonstrate that no deposit consists of 'just rubbish' and that all deposits are artefacts in themselves, which can be considered as part of a wider 'social assemblage'.
Paper short abstract:
This paper investigates the potential of a holistic approach to faunal analysis for the purposes of reconstructing depositional histories, particularly at sites with obscured or unobservable stratigraphy.
Paper long abstract:
Animal bone represents a highly under-exploited resource in the archaeological record. Traditionally faunal analysis has centred on issues surrounding husbandry, economy and processing practices in order to reconstruct foodways in the past. Faunal material is now utilised for a far broader range of purposes and the development of new techniques such as isotopic analysis, genetic research, geometric morphometrics and cementum banding analysis amongst others have substantially enhanced the information that can be gained from animal bones. Unsurprisingly animals remain very much at the centre of research on faunal material, but the osseous remains themselves may have untapped potential for gaining new insights into the archaeological record, particularly in terms of the reconstruction of depositional histories through taphonomic analysis. Bones represent the optimal archaeological resource for reconstructing the taphonomic trajectories of deposits, as they are resistant enough to decay to survive in abundance in the archaeological record (depending on the character of the depositional environment), but also soft and malleable to the degree that they can be altered by a range of processes, thereby taking an imprint of their taphonomic history. Far fewer processes are traceable on ceramics and the few taphonomic indices which are frequently analysed have uncertain or varied aetiologies.
The potential of an analytical approach focussing on a range of different taphonomic indices including weathering, gnawing, trampling, abrasion, mould staining and fracture character is investigated for the purposes of reconstructing depositional histories at sites with uncertain or unobservable stratigraphy. The later prehistoric midden of Potterne is used as a case study.
Paper short abstract:
There appear very fluid definitions of the salvage/looting of underwater sites. Particular motivations of those involved in the process are examined and illustrated by reference to two sunken WWII vessels in Western Crete.
Paper long abstract:
Whether it be termed looting or salvage, the motivations of individuals and/or groups involved in the process vary greatly. The different times at which these actions take place may well also affect the choices made and the methods employed to gather materials from shipwrecks, No matter what the underlying motives these processes have direct impact upon sites and in turn on any later interpretation of the remains that may be undertaken. These notions will be explored and illustrated by reference to recent investigations revolving around two WWII sunken wrecks.