Archaeological Interpretations

Presenting studies in Andean archaeology and iconography by leading specialists in the field, this volume tackles the question of how researchers can come to understand the intangible, intellectual worlds of ancient peoples. Archaeological Interpretations is a fascinating ontological journey through Andean cultures from the fourth millennium BC to the sixteenth century, A.D. Through evidence-based case studies, theoretical models, and methodological reflections, contributors discuss the various interpretations that can be derived from the traces of ritual activity that remain in the material record. They discuss how to accurately comprehend the social significance of artifacts beyond their practical use and how to decode the symbolism of sacred images. Addressing topics including the earliest evidence of shamanism in Ecuador, the meaning of masks among the Mochicas in Peru, the value of metal in the Recuay culture, and ceremonies of voluntary abandonment among the Incas, contributors propose original and innovative ways of interpreting the rich Andean archaeological heritage. Contributors: Luis Jaime Castillo Butters | Peter Eeckhout | Christine Hastorf | Abigail Levine | Geroge F. Lau | Frank Meddens | Charles S. Stanish | Edward Swenson | Gary Urton | Francisco Valdez

This volume provides a forum for debate between varied approaches to the past. The authors, drawn from Europe, North America, Asia and Australasia, represent many different strands of archaeology. They address the philosophical issues involved in interpretation and a desire among archaeologists to come to terms with their own subjective approaches to the material they study, a recognition of how past researchers have also imposed their own value systems on the evidence which they presented.

Archaeology plays an ever increasing role in Qumran studies. Fifteen renowned experts discuss the latest archaeological discoveries and break new ground for a lively debate about the character of the famous site on the shore of the Dead Sea.

Investigations of archaeological intrasite spatial patterns have generally taken one of two directions: studies that introduced and explored methods for the analysis of archaeological spatial patterns or those that described and analyzed the for mation of spatial patterns in actuaiistic-ethnographic, experimental, or natu ral-contexts. The archaeological studies were largely quantitative in nature, concerned with the recognition and definition of patterns; the actualistic efforts were often oriented more toward interpretation, dealing with how patterns formed and what they meant. Our research group on archaeological spatial analysis at the University of Wisconsin-Madison has been working for several years on both quantitative and interpretive problems. Both lines of investigation are closely related and are important complements. In order to demonstrate the convergence of archaeological and actualistic studies for the understanding of intrasite spatial patterns, we organized a sympo sium at the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Society of American Archaeology in Toronto, Canada, in May 1987. The symposium, titled "The Interpretation of Stone Age Archaeological Spatial Patterns," was organized into two sessions. The six papers presented in the morning session, five of which comprise Part I of this volume, focused on ethnoarchaeological and experimental research. Michael Schiffer was the discussant for this half of the symposium. Our intention for the ethnoarchaeological contributions to the symposium and volume was the delin eation of some of the significant accomplishments achieved thus far by actualistic studies regarding the formation of spatial patterns.

Archaeology has been subjected to a wide range of misunderstandings of kinship theory and many of its central concepts. Demonstrating that kinship is the foundation for past societies’ social organization, particularly in non-state societies, Bradley E. Ensor offers a lucid presentation of kinship principles and theories accessible to a broad audience. He provides not only descriptions of what the principles entail but also an understanding of their relevance to past and present topics of interest to archaeologists. His overall goal is always clear: to illustrate how kinship analysis can advance archaeological interpretation and how archaeology can advance kinship theory. The Archaeology of Kinship supports Ensor’s objectives: to demonstrate the relevance of kinship to major archaeological questions, to describe archaeological methods for kinship analysis independent of ethnological interpretation, to illustrate the use of those techniques with a case study, and to provide specific examples of how diachronic analyses address broader theory. As Ensor shows, archaeological diachronic analyses of kinship are independently possible, necessary, and capable of providing new insights into past cultures and broader anthropological theory. Although it is an old subject in anthropology, The Archaeology of Kinship can offer new and exciting frontiers for inquiry. Kinship research in general—and prehistoric kinship in particular—is rapidly reemerging as a topical subject in anthropology. This book is a timely archaeological contribution to that growing literature otherwise dominated by ethnology.

Nineteenth-century medicine is characterised by rapid technological change, new methods of diagnostics and treatments of disease, long-reaching developments in medical science, and professionalisation. This has led to great interest in the period and a large body of scholarly and popular research. However, much of this scholarship studies British, German and French contexts. There is a pressing need to study how knowledge and practice were transferred between regions and how medical technologies were adapted locally. Using Swedish and Danish medical journals, Kristin Halverson looks more closely at the relationships between knowledge, practice and device between 1855 and 1897. Medical devices appear frequently in journals and are often related to practical matters. With this in mind, this study examines four technological concerns in medicine more closely, namely devices used to examine the nose, throat and eye; orthopaedic practice; Listerist antisepsis; and the introduction of asepsis. These cases highlight how technologies were adapted locally and in practice. This is a history of nuance that highlights the diverse landscape of nineteenth-century medical practice.

Scholars who investigate race—a label based upon real or perceived physical differences—realize that they face a formidable task. The concept has been contested and condoned, debated and denied throughout modern history. Presented with the full understanding of the complexity of the issue, Race and Practice in Archaeological Interpretation concentrates on the archaeological analysis of race and how race is determined in the archaeological record. Most archaeologists, even those dealing with recent history, have usually avoided the subject of race, yet Charles E. Orser, Jr., contends that its study and its implications are extremely important for the science of archaeology. Drawing upon his considerable experience as an archaeologist, and using a combination of practice theory as interpreted by Pierre Bourdieu and spatial theory as presented by Henri Lefebvre, Orser argues for an explicit archaeology of race and its interpretation. The author reviews past archaeological usages of race, including a case study from early nineteenth-century Ireland, and explores the way race was used to form ideas about the Mound Builders, the Celts, and Atlantis. He concludes with a proposal that historical archaeology—cast as modern-world archaeology—should take the lead in the archaeological analysis of race because its purview is the recent past, that period during which our conceptions of race developed.

This volume examines evolving trends and transnational perspectives on public interpretation of archaeological and cultural heritage, as well as levels of communication, from local to regional, national and international. It is presented in the context of the evolution of cultural heritage studies from the 20th century “expert approach” to the 21st century “people-centered approach,” with public participation and community involvement at all phases of the decision-making process. Our premise is not just about bringing in community members to be partners in decision making processes; some projects are being initiated by the community--not the heritage experts. In some instances, community members are central in initiating and bringing about change rather than the archaeologists or heritage specialists. In several cases in the book, descendants take the lead in changing heritage narratives. The book addresses several central questions: Do these actions represent new emphases, or more fundamental pedagogical shifts, in interpretation? Are they resulting in more effective interpretation in facilitating emotional and intellectual connections and meanings for audiences? Are they revealing silenced histories? Can they contribute to, or help mediate, dialogues among a diversity of cultures? Can they be shared experiences as examples of good practice at national and international levels? What are the interpretation and presentation challenges for the future? Cultural heritage, as an expression of a diversity of cultures, can be an important mediator between pasts and futures. In the past, people in power from the dominant ethnic, racial, socio-economic, gender, and religious groups determined the heritage message. Minorities were often silenced; their participation in the building and growth of a city, county, or nation’s history was overlooked. New philosophical/methodological trends in public interpretation are reshaping the messages delivered at archaeological/cultural heritage sites worldwide. The role of the experts, as well as the participatory engagement of audiences and stakeholders are being redefined and reassessed. This book explores these processes, their results and effects on the future.