Microhistory and Archaeology: Some Comments and Contributions

Artur Ribeiro
{"title":"Microhistory and Archaeology: Some Comments and Contributions","authors":"Artur Ribeiro","doi":"10.14324/111.2041-9015.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To download this paper, please click  here . Archaeology has always kept an inconsistent relationship with history. For decades, archaeology has either largely rejected what history could offer, such as among certain processual archaeologists, or it has cherry-picked certain elements of historical methods. The closest that archaeologists have ever come to establishing a complete historical method to be applied in archaeology was through the adoption of the idea of the  Annales  School of history. Part of what made the  Annales  School so attractive to archaeologists of all backgrounds was that it tackled the past in a way that was very practical and useful for archaeology: it engaged with the past in the form of  total histories , which could then be segmented in three separate durations and could be studied in an interdisciplinary manner. Additionally, the way the  Annales  School envisaged the past allowed for the study of the past in a very scientific way (e.g. quantitative, statistical), but also allowed the qualitative study of mentalities of the past people under analysis. However, one of the greatest problems of the  Annales  School is that it suppressed the human agent. Whether they were hidden behind structural economic forces or long-term symbolic structures, the individual remained always buried under the large-scale — history, according to  annalistes , could not be the result of individual action. This, in turn, is what eventually led to the demise of the  Annales  School, in favour of the Italian microhistory. Does this mean that the  Annales School of History must be complete scraped? No, the aim of this paper is to demonstrate that archaeology can in fact have a fruitful historical paradigm based on some ideas of the  Annales  School, and at the same time, some ideas of Italian microhistory. This would require understanding microhistory as the reconstruction of the life of agents, small-scale case-studies that serve as exemplars of large-scale phenomena.","PeriodicalId":30238,"journal":{"name":"Papers from the Institute of Archaeology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Papers from the Institute of Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14324/111.2041-9015.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

To download this paper, please click  here . Archaeology has always kept an inconsistent relationship with history. For decades, archaeology has either largely rejected what history could offer, such as among certain processual archaeologists, or it has cherry-picked certain elements of historical methods. The closest that archaeologists have ever come to establishing a complete historical method to be applied in archaeology was through the adoption of the idea of the  Annales  School of history. Part of what made the  Annales  School so attractive to archaeologists of all backgrounds was that it tackled the past in a way that was very practical and useful for archaeology: it engaged with the past in the form of  total histories , which could then be segmented in three separate durations and could be studied in an interdisciplinary manner. Additionally, the way the  Annales  School envisaged the past allowed for the study of the past in a very scientific way (e.g. quantitative, statistical), but also allowed the qualitative study of mentalities of the past people under analysis. However, one of the greatest problems of the  Annales  School is that it suppressed the human agent. Whether they were hidden behind structural economic forces or long-term symbolic structures, the individual remained always buried under the large-scale — history, according to  annalistes , could not be the result of individual action. This, in turn, is what eventually led to the demise of the  Annales  School, in favour of the Italian microhistory. Does this mean that the  Annales School of History must be complete scraped? No, the aim of this paper is to demonstrate that archaeology can in fact have a fruitful historical paradigm based on some ideas of the  Annales  School, and at the same time, some ideas of Italian microhistory. This would require understanding microhistory as the reconstruction of the life of agents, small-scale case-studies that serve as exemplars of large-scale phenomena.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
微观历史与考古学:一些评论和贡献
请按此下载本文。考古学与历史的关系一直不一致。几十年来,考古学要么在很大程度上拒绝历史学所能提供的东西,比如在某些过程考古学家中,要么精选了历史方法的某些元素。考古学家们最接近于建立一套完整的历史方法来应用于考古学,是通过采用历史年鉴学派的思想。编年史学派对各种背景的考古学家如此有吸引力的部分原因是,它以一种对考古学非常实用和有用的方式处理过去:它以整体历史的形式参与过去,然后可以分成三个不同的时间段,以跨学科的方式进行研究。此外,年鉴学派设想过去的方式允许以非常科学的方式研究过去(例如定量,统计),但也允许在分析中对过去的人的心态进行定性研究。然而,年历学派最大的问题之一是它压抑了人的主体。无论是隐藏在结构性经济力量背后,还是长期的符号结构背后,个人始终被埋在大规模之下——根据编年史家的说法,历史不可能是个人行动的结果。反过来,这也最终导致了年鉴学派的消亡,意大利微观史学取而代之。这是否意味着《年鉴》历史学院必须完全报废?不,这篇文章的目的是证明考古学实际上可以有一个富有成效的历史范式,它基于年鉴学派的一些观点,同时也基于意大利微观历史的一些观点。这就需要把微观历史理解为主体生命的重建,作为大规模现象范例的小规模个案研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Ancient Lives, New Stories: Current Research on the Ancient Near East - Introduction Late Holocene lithic points from a Southern Brazilian mound: The Pororó site Form, Content, and Space: Methodological Challenges in the Study of Medieval and Early Modern European Graffiti Walking through Jordan. Essays in Honour of Burton MacDonald Microhistory and Archaeology: Some Comments and Contributions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1