This article gives a concise introduction to some of the potential benefits of studying the archaeology of the 18th to 20th centuries. Using a selection of examples, it aims to provide guides to multi-, inter- and trans-disciplinary approaches to the material culture from this period. It reflects on some of the archaeological remains, the theoretical frameworks and the practices that originated in the 18th to 20th centuries and remain pertinent to those who focus on this period today. By outlining some of the general theoretical underpinnings, and the range of established and emerging practices within what we know as the Anthropocene, it will enable researchers to recognise that they are not alone in their endeavours to explore, interpret, manage and learn from the complex recent pasts.
{"title":"Co-Archaeology: working towards the present through the complex nature of archaeology of the 18th to 20th centuries","authors":"Alex Hale","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.23","url":null,"abstract":"This article gives a concise introduction to some of the potential benefits of studying the archaeology of the 18th to 20th centuries. Using a selection of examples, it aims to provide guides to multi-, inter- and trans-disciplinary approaches to the material culture from this period. It reflects on some of the archaeological remains, the theoretical frameworks and the practices that originated in the 18th to 20th centuries and remain pertinent to those who focus on this period today. By outlining some of the general theoretical underpinnings, and the range of established and emerging practices within what we know as the Anthropocene, it will enable researchers to recognise that they are not alone in their endeavours to explore, interpret, manage and learn from the complex recent pasts.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140280897","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article systematises the architectural and archaeological remains of the Ottoman presence in Sofia and describes the modus operandi reagrding their restoration and reconsideration within the context of the constant urban development of the Bulgarian capital. It shows the main approaches and methods applied by one of the leading national museum institutions in the preservation, presentation, and socialisation of the remains from the Ottoman period (15th-19th centuries).
{"title":"Archaeology of the Ottoman Period (15th-19th centuries) and Museum Management, Sofia, Bulgaria","authors":"Kaloyan Pramatarov","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.21","url":null,"abstract":"This article systematises the architectural and archaeological remains of the Ottoman presence in Sofia and describes the modus operandi reagrding their restoration and reconsideration within the context of the constant urban development of the Bulgarian capital. It shows the main approaches and methods applied by one of the leading national museum institutions in the preservation, presentation, and socialisation of the remains from the Ottoman period (15th-19th centuries).","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140271002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As in many other European countries, Austria's archaeologists have been dealing with the remains from two World Wars as part of excavations for years. Over the last 20 years, three topics have become very important in Austrian Heritage Management and the following contribution attempts to give an overview. The three big issues are: There are still an unknown number of camps from both World War II and World War I Alpine terrain holds the remains of two World Wars on slopes and ridges of up to 3000m above sea level. These sites present challenges in terms of climate change, tourism and public interest in an area of conflict. Industrially produced mass finds of the 20th century from excavations can be connected with atrocities from the two wars and are therefore worthy of protection. Who decides, and on what basis?
{"title":"Another Case of Making Choices: Alpine terrain, large-scale sites and mass finds of the 20th century","authors":"Eva Steigberger","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.7","url":null,"abstract":"As in many other European countries, Austria's archaeologists have been dealing with the remains from two World Wars as part of excavations for years. Over the last 20 years, three topics have become very important in Austrian Heritage Management and the following contribution attempts to give an overview. The three big issues are: There are still an unknown number of camps from both World War II and World War I Alpine terrain holds the remains of two World Wars on slopes and ridges of up to 3000m above sea level. These sites present challenges in terms of climate change, tourism and public interest in an area of conflict. Industrially produced mass finds of the 20th century from excavations can be connected with atrocities from the two wars and are therefore worthy of protection. Who decides, and on what basis?","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140279075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article evaluates how nationalist narratives affect the display of Roman artefacts in national museums. The unique nature of national museums as 'cultural constitutions' and arbiters of the 'Authorised Heritage Discourse' is discussed. This article builds upon previous work by demonstrating how nationalist influence affects the display of Roman artefacts, specifically through the use of two case studies: the British Museum in London and the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh. Museum displays are assessed for indications of nationalist influence through consideration of the use of space and collection composition as well as textual analysis of gallery signage and artefact descriptions. The two museums' divergent approaches to national narrative are then compared.
{"title":"'All this in their ignorance they called civilisation': Analysing the Relationship between Nationalism and the Display of Roman Archaeology in Britain's National Museums","authors":"William Givens","doi":"10.11141/ia.67.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.67.9","url":null,"abstract":"This article evaluates how nationalist narratives affect the display of Roman artefacts in national museums. The unique nature of national museums as 'cultural constitutions' and arbiters of the 'Authorised Heritage Discourse' is discussed. This article builds upon previous work by demonstrating how nationalist influence affects the display of Roman artefacts, specifically through the use of two case studies: the British Museum in London and the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh. Museum displays are assessed for indications of nationalist influence through consideration of the use of space and collection composition as well as textual analysis of gallery signage and artefact descriptions. The two museums' divergent approaches to national narrative are then compared.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140087894","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Martina Tenzer, Giada Pistilli, Alex Bransden, Alex Shenfield
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is not a recent development. However, with increasing computational capabilities, AI has developed into Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning, technologies particularly good at detecting correlations and patterns, and categorising, predicting, or extracting information. Within archaeology, AI can process big data accumulated over decades of research and deposited in archives. By combining these capabilities, AI offers new insights and exciting opportunities to create knowledge from archaeological archives for contemporary and future research. However, the ethical implications and human costs are not yet fully understood. Therefore, we question whether AI in archaeology is a blessing or a curse.
{"title":"Debating AI in Archaeology: applications, implications, and ethical considerations","authors":"Martina Tenzer, Giada Pistilli, Alex Bransden, Alex Shenfield","doi":"10.11141/ia.67.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.67.8","url":null,"abstract":"Artificial Intelligence (AI) is not a recent development. However, with increasing computational capabilities, AI has developed into Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning, technologies particularly good at detecting correlations and patterns, and categorising, predicting, or extracting information. Within archaeology, AI can process big data accumulated over decades of research and deposited in archives. By combining these capabilities, AI offers new insights and exciting opportunities to create knowledge from archaeological archives for contemporary and future research. However, the ethical implications and human costs are not yet fully understood. Therefore, we question whether AI in archaeology is a blessing or a curse.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140091974","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The process of industrialisation and its effects on traditional crafts can be studied archaeologically particularly well in the area of pottery production, as extensive production remains in the form of misfired pottery can be excavated in addition to workshops and kilns, and provide a good insight into the range of forms and decorations produced at the location. Archaeological research thus provides an insight that archival documents and museum collections can only offer in exceptional cases, as company archives are seldom preserved and everyday tablewares rarely become part of museum collections. Using two case studies from Frechen and Bedburg-Königshoven, this article shows how craftspeople retained their traditional vessel forms and tried to adapt to the changing tastes of consumers and compete with industrially produced ceramics. Excavations in Bonn-Poppelsdorf provide an insight into the emergence and development of a ceramic factory, which developed from a small faience pottery in the mid-18th century to an internationally operating company by the beginning of the 20th century, producing industrial whitewares and porcelain. The fourth example concerns a small factory in Bonn-Duisdorf, founded in 1908 as the Kunsttöpferei Gerhards & Wittelsberger and later renamed as the Lapitesta Werk Duisdorf. Here, research can be based not only on finds from archaeological excavation but also on objects in the Bonn City Museum and extensive archival sources dealing with the first 10 years of production.
{"title":"Between Craft and Industry: Archaeological research on Rhenish pottery production of the late 18th to early 20th century","authors":"Christoph Keller","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.8","url":null,"abstract":"The process of industrialisation and its effects on traditional crafts can be studied archaeologically particularly well in the area of pottery production, as extensive production remains in the form of misfired pottery can be excavated in addition to workshops and kilns, and provide a good insight into the range of forms and decorations produced at the location. Archaeological research thus provides an insight that archival documents and museum collections can only offer in exceptional cases, as company archives are seldom preserved and everyday tablewares rarely become part of museum collections. Using two case studies from Frechen and Bedburg-Königshoven, this article shows how craftspeople retained their traditional vessel forms and tried to adapt to the changing tastes of consumers and compete with industrially produced ceramics. Excavations in Bonn-Poppelsdorf provide an insight into the emergence and development of a ceramic factory, which developed from a small faience pottery in the mid-18th century to an internationally operating company by the beginning of the 20th century, producing industrial whitewares and porcelain. The fourth example concerns a small factory in Bonn-Duisdorf, founded in 1908 as the Kunsttöpferei Gerhards & Wittelsberger and later renamed as the Lapitesta Werk Duisdorf. Here, research can be based not only on finds from archaeological excavation but also on objects in the Bonn City Museum and extensive archival sources dealing with the first 10 years of production.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140268479","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) Archaeology and Heritage operate under a Code of Practice (CoP) for Archaeology (2017) as agreed with the present Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage (MHLGH). In accordance with the CoP, a Project Archaeologist is assigned to each scheme. TII Project Archaeologists are responsible not just for archaeological remains, but for cultural heritage in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 2014/52/EU and Environmental Protection Agency Guidelines. Therefore our responsibilities equally encompass the management of built and cultural heritage constraints. This is inclusive of statutory constraints such as National Monuments, Record of Monuments and Places (RMPs) sites, and Protected Structures, and non-statutory constraints such as those included on the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (NIAH), industrial heritage complexes, parklands, statues, and street furniture.Between 2013 to 2017, TII managed the various cultural heritage requirements of works contracts associated with the construction of Luas Cross City (LCC) in Dublin, Ireland. This scheme provides an ideal case study to consider how archaeological projects can help us understand the development and eastward expansion of the city's public realm from the late 17th to the 20th century. It also demonstrates how we can apply lessons learned from cultural heritage works to engineering contracts.
{"title":"Different Schemes, Same City? How lessons from Luas Cross City works are informing the design and implementation of the Luas Finglas and MetroLink Cultural Heritage Strategies","authors":"Emer Dennehy","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.20","url":null,"abstract":"Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) Archaeology and Heritage operate under a Code of Practice (CoP) for Archaeology (2017) as agreed with the present Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage (MHLGH). In accordance with the CoP, a Project Archaeologist is assigned to each scheme. TII Project Archaeologists are responsible not just for archaeological remains, but for cultural heritage in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 2014/52/EU and Environmental Protection Agency Guidelines. Therefore our responsibilities equally encompass the management of built and cultural heritage constraints. This is inclusive of statutory constraints such as National Monuments, Record of Monuments and Places (RMPs) sites, and Protected Structures, and non-statutory constraints such as those included on the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (NIAH), industrial heritage complexes, parklands, statues, and street furniture.Between 2013 to 2017, TII managed the various cultural heritage requirements of works contracts associated with the construction of Luas Cross City (LCC) in Dublin, Ireland. This scheme provides an ideal case study to consider how archaeological projects can help us understand the development and eastward expansion of the city's public realm from the late 17th to the 20th century. It also demonstrates how we can apply lessons learned from cultural heritage works to engineering contracts.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140270992","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Since the 1980s, there have been increasing efforts by heritage offices in Germany and Austria, and many of the countries that were occupied by Nazi Germany during World War II, to locate places of former Nazi terror and, where possible, to protect them from further destruction in order to preserve them as places of remembrance for the victims of National Socialism. However, methodological considerations and approaches for locating, recording, and eventually assessing the 'heritage value' of former Nazi terror sites remain rather obscure, since little has been published on the methodological approaches taken by different institutions. This article presents a systematic workflow for recording former sites of Nazi terror, which was developed in the framework of the Natzweiler-Concentration-Camp-System-Project based at the Heritage Office of the State of Baden-Württemberg (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege im Regierungspräsidium Stuttgart). It aims to provide a methodological 'How-To' for creating archaeological inventories of former Nazi camps, associated sites and whole 'landscapes of destruction', hints at where to locate useful primary sources, but also to critically reflect on challenges encountered during the project and how they could be approached in the future.
自 20 世纪 80 年代以来，德国和奥地利以及二战期间被纳粹德国占领的许多国家的遗 产管理部门越来越多地努力寻找前纳粹恐怖遗址，并在可能的情况下保护这些遗址免遭进 一步破坏，以便将其作为国家社会主义受害者的纪念场所加以保护。然而，对前纳粹恐怖遗址进行定位、记录并最终评估其 "遗产价值 "的方法论考虑因素和方法仍然相当模糊，因为关于不同机构所采用的方法论方法的出版物很少。本文介绍了记录前纳粹恐怖遗址的系统工作流程，该流程是在巴登-符腾堡州遗产办公室（Landesamt für Denkmalpflege im Regierungspräsidium Stuttgart）的纳茨魏勒集中营系统项目框架内开发的。该项目旨在为编制前纳粹集中营、相关遗址和整个 "毁灭景观 "的考古清单提供方法论上的 "如何做"，提示在哪里可以找到有用的原始资料，同时对项目中遇到的挑战以及今后如何应对这些挑战进行批判性思考。
{"title":"Locating Former Nazi Terror Sites: A Methodological 'How-To' for Archaeological Research and Heritage Management","authors":"Barbara Hausmair, Attila Dézsi","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.11","url":null,"abstract":"Since the 1980s, there have been increasing efforts by heritage offices in Germany and Austria, and many of the countries that were occupied by Nazi Germany during World War II, to locate places of former Nazi terror and, where possible, to protect them from further destruction in order to preserve them as places of remembrance for the victims of National Socialism. However, methodological considerations and approaches for locating, recording, and eventually assessing the 'heritage value' of former Nazi terror sites remain rather obscure, since little has been published on the methodological approaches taken by different institutions. This article presents a systematic workflow for recording former sites of Nazi terror, which was developed in the framework of the Natzweiler-Concentration-Camp-System-Project based at the Heritage Office of the State of Baden-Württemberg (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege im Regierungspräsidium Stuttgart). It aims to provide a methodological 'How-To' for creating archaeological inventories of former Nazi camps, associated sites and whole 'landscapes of destruction', hints at where to locate useful primary sources, but also to critically reflect on challenges encountered during the project and how they could be approached in the future.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140277635","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Archaeological research in the former Warsaw Ghetto conducted in 2021-2022 was the first scientific investigation undertaken in the area in a systematic and planned way. Non-invasive research took place in four locations, followed by excavation campaigns in two selected sites and revealed the cellars of the pre-war buildings and lots of artefacts. Especially interesting was the immediate vicinity of the so-called Anielewicz bunker, where the commander of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in 1943, Mordechai Anielewicz, fought his last battle. Very little is known about the bunker itself and the excavations have shed new light on the issue, possibly unearthing part of the bunker's extended structure. We have to be aware that in comparison to the typical problems of urban archaeology, the archaeology of the Warsaw Ghetto faces some specific issues. The post-war buildings in the area were constructed on the rubble of the ancient city, almost completely destroyed by the Nazis during World War II. Moreover, the former residential quarter of the murdered Jews carries a huge emotional load, and any archaeological find made here acquires symbolic significance. Thus the social reception of the research is extremely important.
{"title":"Underground City: Archaeology of the Warsaw Ghetto in its academic, memorial and social context","authors":"jacek Konik","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.16","url":null,"abstract":"Archaeological research in the former Warsaw Ghetto conducted in 2021-2022 was the first scientific investigation undertaken in the area in a systematic and planned way. Non-invasive research took place in four locations, followed by excavation campaigns in two selected sites and revealed the cellars of the pre-war buildings and lots of artefacts. Especially interesting was the immediate vicinity of the so-called Anielewicz bunker, where the commander of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in 1943, Mordechai Anielewicz, fought his last battle. Very little is known about the bunker itself and the excavations have shed new light on the issue, possibly unearthing part of the bunker's extended structure. We have to be aware that in comparison to the typical problems of urban archaeology, the archaeology of the Warsaw Ghetto faces some specific issues. The post-war buildings in the area were constructed on the rubble of the ancient city, almost completely destroyed by the Nazis during World War II. Moreover, the former residential quarter of the murdered Jews carries a huge emotional load, and any archaeological find made here acquires symbolic significance. Thus the social reception of the research is extremely important.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140280309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The era in which the distinction between natural processes and human activity was clear has passed. Since at least the 'Great Acceleration' of the mid-20th century, we have entered a new phase where environmental changes, unprecedented in scale, are no longer purely natural. Instead, they stem from the growth of a hybrid aggregate, both natural and artificial. Consequently, things and places can no longer remain unchanged; they do not adhere to our previous conceptions. 'Non-human' entities now respond to our actions, rendering them inherently cultural and anthropogenic. Operating within the present, these entities not only act but also accumulate a form of material memory over time. Even seemingly inert matter is alive, facing the challenges of the Anthropocene: an era characterized by devastation and the destruction of material memory. Thus, the concept of heritage takes on new significance: what does it mean now, and what purpose does it serve? How do we define saving, protecting, or even acknowledging what we continue to call archaeological heritage? The most profound transformations of the Anthropocene are yet to unfold, underscoring the limitations of archaeological practice, which primarily focuses on human creations at a human scale.
{"title":"Contemporary Archaeologies and Cultural Heritage in the Anthropocenic Age","authors":"Laurent Olivier","doi":"10.11141/ia.66.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.66.2","url":null,"abstract":"The era in which the distinction between natural processes and human activity was clear has passed. Since at least the 'Great Acceleration' of the mid-20th century, we have entered a new phase where environmental changes, unprecedented in scale, are no longer purely natural. Instead, they stem from the growth of a hybrid aggregate, both natural and artificial. Consequently, things and places can no longer remain unchanged; they do not adhere to our previous conceptions. 'Non-human' entities now respond to our actions, rendering them inherently cultural and anthropogenic. Operating within the present, these entities not only act but also accumulate a form of material memory over time. Even seemingly inert matter is alive, facing the challenges of the Anthropocene: an era characterized by devastation and the destruction of material memory. Thus, the concept of heritage takes on new significance: what does it mean now, and what purpose does it serve? How do we define saving, protecting, or even acknowledging what we continue to call archaeological heritage? The most profound transformations of the Anthropocene are yet to unfold, underscoring the limitations of archaeological practice, which primarily focuses on human creations at a human scale.","PeriodicalId":38724,"journal":{"name":"Internet Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140280887","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：