Talk:Archaeology

Template:Archaeology project

Talk:Archaeology archive 1

Contents

1 Flavio Biondo 2 Suggest 34 possible wiki links and 1 possible backlink for Archaeology. 3 Wikiproject 4 Version 1.0 validation 4.1 Bibliography 5 Wikiportal 6 Addition to subdiscipline? 7 Where does information on this belong on Wikipedia? 8 Shortening entry 9 Metal detectors 10 announcing policy proposal 11 The Stone Age 12 Crazy new culture in Central Europe

Flavio Biondo

Flavio Biondo is an Italian historian and author who has been called "The First Archaeologist". He wrote three influential books that systematically described the topography and ruins of Rome in the early 15th century. The first time anything like that had been done anywhere. My interest is history, and not archaeology, I was hopeing someone could help me if or where he belongs in this article and in what capacity. Did not see a "history of archaeology" section. I don't want to call him "the first" if it is hype, but I have seen it used in other sources, and don't know enough about the field to know how accurate a claim it is. Stbalbach 06:22, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

A reference on the page History of archaeology would be great! Personally, if you can give a reference to an academic who called him the first archaeologist then I'd use it, otherwise I'd put "one of the first". Thanks. --G Rutter 08:54, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, I missed that page, I'll try over there.Stbalbach 23:26, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Suggest 34 possible wiki links and 1 possible backlink for Archaeology.

An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Archaeology article:

• Can link 14th century: ...outs of medieval villages abandoned after the crises of the 14th century and the equally lost layouts of 17th-century parterre garde...
• Can link folk religion: ...ion - the development of [[agriculture]], cult practices of folk religion, the rise of the first [[city|cities]] - must come from arc... (link to section)
• <s> Can link writing systems: ...]'', which concerns itself with societies that did not have writing systems. However, the term is generally valid only in [[Europe]] an... (link to section)
• <s> Can link bodies of water: ...pwreck]]s as well as settlements that have been engulfed by bodies of water.... (link to section)
• <s>Can link sixteenth century: ...ology]] is the study of material culture in Europe from the sixteenth century onwards.... (link to section)
• <s> Can link public land: ...her statutes, this mandates that no construction project on public land or involving public funds may damage an unstudied archaeolo... (link to section)
• <s> Can link archaeological site: ...blic land or involving public funds may damage an unstudied archaeological site. ... (link to section)
• <s> Can link Western civilisation: ...of the archaeological record by the ever-sprawling works of Western civilisation, but it leaves something to be desired. CRM is conducted by... (link to section)
• <s> Can link the early days: ...rgely the same methods. Survey was not widely practiced in the early days of archaeology. Cultural historians and prior researchers w... (link to section)
• <s> Can link stone structures: ...ld]] caused by [[iron]] artefacts, [[kiln]]s, some types of stone structures, and even ditches and middens. Devices that measure the [[e... (link to section)
• <s> Can link cultural history: ...chaeology|cultural, or culture history]]'''. The product of cultural history was to group sites into distinct "cultures", to determine t... (link to section)
• <s> Can link diffusionism: ...cal material had been excavated and studied to suggest that diffusionism was not the only mechanism through which change occurred. I... (link to section)
• <s> Can link inter-war: ...hange occurred. Influenced by the political upheaval of the inter-war period Childe then argued that [[revolution]]s had wrought ... (link to section)
• <s> Can link social organisation: ...nomadically. This would have led to considerable changes in social organisation, which Childe argued led to a second [[Urban Revolution]] t... (link to section)
• <s>Can link exact sciences: ...cessual archaeology]]'''). Processualists borrowed from the exact sciences the idea of [[hypothesis]] testing and the [[scientific met... (link to section)
• <s> Can link ethnic groups: ...g clear, largely through the evidence of anthropology, that ethnic groups and their development were not always entirely congruent wi... (link to section)
• <s> Can link personal experience: ...ng that every archaeologist is in fact biased by his or her personal experience and background, and thus truly scientific archaeological wo... (link to section)
• <s> Can link resource management: ...cognised in such fields as visitor interpretation, cultural resource management and ethics in archaeology as well as fieldwork. It has also... (link to section)
• <s> Can link social change: ...male, elders vs. juniors, workers vs. owners) in generating social change. Some contemporary cultural groups have tried, with varying... (link to section)
• <s>Can link post-modernism: ...enced by neo-Darwinian evolutionary thought, phenomenology, post-modernism, agency theory, and cognitive science.... (link to section)
• <s> Can link public interest: ...e doing their work for is often discussed. Without a strong public interest in the subject, often sparked by significant finds and cele... (link to section)
• <s> Can link building site: ... indemnity insurance issues involved in working on a modern building site to tight deadlines. Certain charities and local government ... (link to section)
• <s> Can link local government: ...ern building site to tight deadlines. Certain charities and local government bodies sometimes offer places on research projects either a... (link to section)
• <s> Can link local group: ...ld without having to pay for the privilege should contact a local group.... (link to section)
• <s> Can link non-fiction authors: ...rk (discussed above), as well as some actual activity. Many non-fiction authors have ignored the scientific methods of [[processual archaeo... (link to section)
• <s>Can link buried treasure: ...g=== Looting of archaeological sites by people in search of buried treasure is an ancient problem. For instance, many of the tombs of t... (link to section)
• <s>Can link Third World: ... The popular consciousness may associate looting with poor Third World countries. Many are former homes to many well-known ancient... (link to section)
• <s>Can link well-founded: ...ican Indians tend to mistrust archaeology. This mistrust is well-founded. For years, American archaeologists have been digging up In... (link to section) Incorrect link
• Can link native peoples: ...haeologists have begun to actively enlist the assistance of native peoples likely to be descended from those under study.... (link to section)

Done or not appropriate. Not sure about the ones in the bibliography sections below. What do people think? --G Rutter 12:07, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Can link Alternative History: ....com/maat/index.php Hall of Maat]'' : Weighing evidence for Alternative History, pseudohistory, and pseudoarchaeology.... (link to section)
• Can link web directory: ... the Internet] - Anthropology Resources on the Internet : a web directory with over 3000 links grouped in specialised topics.... (link to section)
• Can link Mountain View: ...Discovering Our Past: A Brief Introduction to Archaeology'' Mountain View: Mayfield Publishing Company. ISBN 076741196X. This has als... (link to section)
• Can link trade paperback: ...field.com/ Rowman and Littlefield Pub Inc], December, 2001, trade paperback, 256 pages, ISBN 0759100950... (link to section)
• Can link Cambridge University Press: ...ce. 1990. "A History of Archaeological Thought". Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521338182... (link to section)

Additionally, there are some other articles which may be able to linked to this one (also known as "backlinks"):

• In Hulk (ship), can backlink ARCHAEOLOGY: ...alled and surpassed the cog. Selections from: HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE SHIP - LECTURE NOTES... Not appropriate I think --G Rutter 12:07, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Notes: The article text has not been changed in any way; Some of these suggestions may be wrong, some may be right.
Feedback: I like it, I hate it, Please don't link to — LinkBot 11:25, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'm not at all sold on well-founded relation and The Early Days. I also think Stone structures and resource management need more work before they're worth linking from here. adamsan 15:43, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wikiproject

I've started a very rough Archaeology Wikiproject. If you're interested in joining up and guiding it in these early days then please come along and start editing. I'd certainly like to get Template:Archaeology_tasks fleshed out. adamsan 13:55, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'm happy to help. I'll visit the template and see what's up. Rattus 21:25, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Version 1.0 validation

I see that archaeology is listed as one of the hundred-odd articles that the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team have selected as targets for Wiki 1.0 validation. Culture is the only article they have edited so far and they are looking for Harvard-style references, style guide conventions, images, npov, decently-written text etc. It won't be easy but the more sub-editing we can do ourselves then less they will have to do and the chances of any howlers being accidentally created are also lower.

Can anyone suggest some possible images to accompany the article, preferably not too anywhere-centric? adamsan 14:46, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I would suggest that a photo of archaeologists working, or of a particular technique in action, would be far more valuable than pictures of any particular sites. I've certainly taken photos while on digs, but they are not that great. However, I'm sure there are plenty of others that we could get permission to use. Is this the kind of thing you were thinking of? Deb 16:56, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds good to me. I take a rubbish photo myself but I'm sure we can source a few that that cover some of the topics in the article without being too biased towards any particular period or region. This may also be a prime opportunity to discuss exactly what we want this article to cover in general and whether the structure is working for any level of reader. adamsan 17:12, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Bibliography

I notice stuff being added to the "Further reading" section, and I wondered if we should take it out and make it a separate article, giving lots of room for expansion? Deb 10:51, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Looking at the Manual of Style, I can't see any rule against doing this. We could have different sections for fieldwork, theory, crm etc. adamsan 17:43, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wikiportal

Although I have signally failed to keep up the Archaeology Wikiproject that hasn't stopped me starting the Archaeology Wikiportal with pictures and everything!. Feel free to come along and add stuff. adamsan 22:53, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Addition to subdiscipline?

I was recently asked how one could become a "forensic archaeologist" and couldn't quite understand the concept. The term "forensic" (something to do with the court system, law, current criminal investigations) and "archaeology" (something to do with the past) didn't seem to jive well. Well, I did a bit of search and apparently UCL offers a masters course in "forensic archaeological science" and I even found a definition on one of the websites. Apparently it's supposed to be "archaeology using method and theory borrowed from the forensic sciences (I guess kind of like palaeopathology... but I can't see why it would have to be specifically forsensic science), OR using archaeological method and theory to aid in forensic research of a current, on-going criminal investigation". The latter tends to make a little more sense, because I can see how archaeological techniques (excavation, recording and interpretation of stratigraphic information, etc.) could be of help at a crime scene, especially if the dead bodies are buried (which, I guess, they often are). Any way, I was wondering if forensic archaeology should be added to the list of subdisciplines and exactly how to define it if it should.rawhead

A friend of mine did the UCL Forensics MA, stabbed and buried a load of dead sheep for her thesis. The police use forensic archs in murder investigations, as yes the work involves excavating shallow graves and keeping a thorough record of the work as well as borrowing a lot from pathology in terms of bone analysis and studying trauma. The UN hired a load to go and dig up the mass graves in Bosnia and some have gone out to excavate Saddam's mass graves in Iraq. It is gruesome stuff and most archaeologists prefer their bones not have flesh still on them but it is easily the best-paying area of the field if you can stomach it. I'm sure we can thrash out a definition on the article page. adamsan 12:57, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Where does information on this belong on Wikipedia?

Medieval works found at LNG site (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4413745.stm) I don't know how to classify the find. Adraeus 21:28, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'd suggest waiting until there is more information published that confirms the date and the type of metal being produced. As to the question of classification of the site, 'Medieval smithy' is used quite a bit. Rattus 22:40, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Shortening entry

I'd like to start tightening up and shortening (slightly) this entry. For starters, would anybody have any objections if the Academic sub-disciplines section was removed (leaving a couple sentences in its place) and shifted to another page (e.g. Archaeological sub-disciplines)? Any other suggestions? Rattus 14:00, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'd say hive off Archaeological Theory, History of Archaeology and Cultural Resources Mgmt too. adamsan 14:58, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, should probably have checked here first- I finally got around to moving Archaeological theory to its own page which I've been meaning to do for ages. History of archaeology and Cultural resources management already have their own pages, although the CRM section on this page could probably be shortened. I agree with moving Archaeological sub-disciplines to its own entry. Personally, I find the "Relations with the public" section a bit strange- any suggestions, or is this just me?! --G Rutter 16:05, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Whoops, I am behind the times. Yes Relations with the public is a bit odd; I've never seen another wikipedia page about a major discipline with such a heading. Maybe some could be absorbed by CRM? I long to sort out the introduction too. adamsan 18:00, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The "Relations with the public" section seems fine to me. All the material therein is significant. As for the title, I have considered "Archaeology for the layman" (inappropriately gender specific term), "Public face of archaeology" (too racy), "Amateur archaeology" (too narrow) and others. I cannot come up with anything satisfactory. This reflects the prevailing problems with public involvement with arcaheology, I guess. --Theo (Talk) 19:39, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I cannot think of any other profession that could call as one of its own a fictional character as famous and as inaccurate as Indiana Jones. Also, for a variety of reasons many of the objects of archeological study have considerable commercial value — which is often in direct conflict with archeology values. Reasons enough for a section on archeology and the public. Slrubenstein | Talk 19:49, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

How about Modern issues in Archaeology? It sounds more encompassing that Archaeology and the public to me and less suggestive of a gulf between amateur and paid archaeologists. Also, could elements of field survey and excavation could be shifted to their subpages? adamsan 20:49, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

From 'Modern' I infer 'before Postmodern'. 'Issues in archaeology' would encompass the processualism/post-procuessualism debate and other theoretical discussions as well as the public-professional interface (please forgive the succinct but pompous jargon) that this section embraces. How about 'Current issues with <a better phrase than 'the public-professional interface'>'? --Theo (Talk) 22:05, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The term Public Archaeology is used a lot in the US and UK to refer to many of these topics (including indigenous peoples' concerns, heritage management, public involvement, and archaeology and popular culture --- there is a journal entitled the same where these issues are debated). Would Public Archaeology thus be a reasonable heading for these issues? And re. moving some things into new articles --- I'll have a look later today/evening, and see what I can do...--Rattus 23:55, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I understood Public Archaeology to mean the involvement of non-professional archaeologists in the discipline through outreach and suchlike. Does it encompass pseudoscience and the ethics of human remains handling? If it does, it is ideal. --Theo (Talk) 00:01, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Certainly the latter, but only possibly the former. However, my guess is that the even if they haven't already, the editors of Public Archaeology would entertain a submision on (e.g.) 'Pseudoarchaeology and Pyramidiots'--Rattus 01:55, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'm convinced. Let's do it. --Theo (Talk) 01:09, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) 'Tis done. --Theo (Talk) 01:11, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

the Subdisciplines need more than a wikilink. Each needs a sentence or two describing what it is, to keep this main article complete. --Wetman 20:17, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Metal detectors

• Former text: "Metal detectors can be used to locate metal artifacts."

Edir:"Metal detectors can be used to locate metal artifacts." The use of metal detectors to locate metal artifacts is not archaeology, but treasure-hunting. The previous text is better; however, some text on the actual use of metal detectors in professional archaeology would be welcome. --Wetman 16:47, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The use of metal detectors to find and retrieve metal artefacts without recording their context may well be treasure hunting. But that is not what the text says. Changing " Metal detectors can be used to locate metal artifacts." to " Metal detectors sense the presence of ancient metal artifacts." implies that archaeology is only concerned with the "ancient". It is also a more passive form than that which it replaces (but that is secondary). Uses that fall outside the identification of "ancient metal artefacts" include musketball distribution analysis on English Civil War battlefields, service cable location during evaluation, and metal distribution analysis prior to excavation of nineteenth century ship wreck. --Theo (Talk) 18:12, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Theo is correct. One thing we must be very vigilant about in this article is not to give the impression that archeologists only study the past. The only thing of substance effected by Wetman's change is to add the word "ancient" which is wrong — inaccurate and misleading. Using metal detectors to find artefacts is not necessarily "treasure-hunting," nor is it necessarily archeology. What matters is the purpose. If the purpose is to accumulate items that have a market value today, that is treasure hunting; if the purpose is to gain insight into other ways of life, that is archeology. Metal detectors are tools, nothing more. It all depends on how they are used. Wetman is right that it would be good to provide some actual examples of archeologists using metal detectors, or have a citation to an archeology textbook.Slrubenstein | Talk 18:39, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Spot on. Deb 19:37, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

announcing policy proposal

This is just to inform people that I want Wikipedia to accept a general policy that BC and AD represent a Christian Point of View and should be used only when they are appropriate, that is, in the context of expressing or providing an account of a Christian point of view. In other contexts, I argue that they violate our NPOV policy and we should use BCE and CE instead. See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/BCE-CE Debate for the detailed proposal. Slrubenstein | Talk 22:55, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

The Stone Age

The Stone Age article is the current Collaboration of the Week. The contributors need help with their additions and frankly I don't really know where to begin without discouraging them. Anyone interested in providing some gentle guidance should drop in if they have a moment. Or is it better to wait till they've finished and then blitz it? adamsan 19:15, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Crazy new culture in Central Europe

Has anyone any more information on these cats (http://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/001336.html)? The article doesn't go into much detail, like provide a name and much of the text seems to be copied from Neolithic 101 but if the dating is correct we are going to need an article on 'em. adamsan 19:49, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Somebody penned Monumental temples in prehistoric Central Europe with a link to an Independent article, and I've added some info to Neolithic. It is exciting, but I think it would be prudent to wait until there was more info, including plans and how the dating was established, before much more is said about a new 'civilisation'. Rattus 21:50, 14 Jun 2005 UTC