{"title":"Ola Wolfhechel Jensen (ed.) 2012 Histories of Archaeological Practices. Reflections on Methods, Strategies and Social Organisation in Past Fieldwork.","authors":"T. Murray","doi":"10.5334/BHA.22205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.22205","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2012-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA.22205","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71063002","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}
Relations between Spain and Italy are always described, by the inhabitants of both countries, as ‘fraternal’. Spanish archaeologists had close intellectual and personal ties with Italian archaeology and its archaeologists, after all they shared a Latin culture and a Roman past. Prior to the Spanish Civil War, and through the efforts of Spanish archaeologists Bosch Gimpera and Hugo Obermaier, this network, that spanned both Classical and prehistoric archaeologies, was used to support the holding of the IV International Congress on Classical Archaeology in Barcelona in 1929, and this lead, among other things, to the foundation of the Congres International des Sciences Prehistoriques et Protohistoriques in Berne in 1932 (CISPP), the forerunner of today’s UISPP. However, common Spanish and Italian archaeological interests also caused the development of Italian-style monumentalist archaeological projects at Romano-Hispanic sites. Eventually under the new Fascist government in Spain, and archaeologists such as Garcia y Bellido, Santa Olalla, Taracena and Almagro, archaeology was used to justify Spanish nationalism, and its ideology of empire, strong central leadership, and political and linguistic unity.
{"title":"Academic Relations Between Italian and Spanish Archaeologists and Prehistorians, 1916–1936","authors":"F. G. Alonso","doi":"10.5334/BHA.22203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.22203","url":null,"abstract":"Relations between Spain and Italy are always described, by the inhabitants of both countries, as ‘fraternal’. Spanish archaeologists had close intellectual and personal ties with Italian archaeology and its archaeologists, after all they shared a Latin culture and a Roman past. Prior to the Spanish Civil War, and through the efforts of Spanish archaeologists Bosch Gimpera and Hugo Obermaier, this network, that spanned both Classical and prehistoric archaeologies, was used to support the holding of the IV International Congress on Classical Archaeology in Barcelona in 1929, and this lead, among other things, to the foundation of the Congres International des Sciences Prehistoriques et Protohistoriques in Berne in 1932 (CISPP), the forerunner of today’s UISPP. However, common Spanish and Italian archaeological interests also caused the development of Italian-style monumentalist archaeological projects at Romano-Hispanic sites. Eventually under the new Fascist government in Spain, and archaeologists such as Garcia y Bellido, Santa Olalla, Taracena and Almagro, archaeology was used to justify Spanish nationalism, and its ideology of empire, strong central leadership, and political and linguistic unity.","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2012-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA.22203","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71062930","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 attitudes and beliefs that archaeologists bring to their profession can have important impacts upon the manner in which they approach their work; therefore, studying an archaeologist’s life can shed light on archaeological history. An investigation of the early life of the Mexican archaeologist Alberto Ruz Lhuillier provides fascinating evidence of just how life experiences can have an impact on attitudes and theoretical approaches. Ruz was the archaeologist who, in 1952, discovered the magnificent tomb of the Classic Maya King of Palenque, Mexico, K’inich Janaab’ Pakal I. Research into Ruz’s early life sheds light on why he had negative opinions about the United States (US), and highlights the experiences that caused them, and explains how they changed. When Ruz moved to Cuba in the 1930s, and learned about the impact of American interference in Cuban affairs, he became deeply involved in the socialist revolution to oust Cuba’s US puppet dictators and to free his country from ‘yanqui’ imperialism. In addition, these early student life experiences exposed him to other students who espoused the theories and ideas of Karl Marx. Later Ruz would use some of these theories to explain the development and fall of ancient Maya civilization.
{"title":"Profile of Alberto Ruz Lhuillier as a Young Man","authors":"Elaine Day Schele","doi":"10.5334/BHA.22202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.22202","url":null,"abstract":"The attitudes and beliefs that archaeologists bring to their profession can have important impacts upon the manner in which they approach their work; therefore, studying an archaeologist’s life can shed light on archaeological history. An investigation of the early life of the Mexican archaeologist Alberto Ruz Lhuillier provides fascinating evidence of just how life experiences can have an impact on attitudes and theoretical approaches. Ruz was the archaeologist who, in 1952, discovered the magnificent tomb of the Classic Maya King of Palenque, Mexico, K’inich Janaab’ Pakal I. Research into Ruz’s early life sheds light on why he had negative opinions about the United States (US), and highlights the experiences that caused them, and explains how they changed. When Ruz moved to Cuba in the 1930s, and learned about the impact of American interference in Cuban affairs, he became deeply involved in the socialist revolution to oust Cuba’s US puppet dictators and to free his country from ‘yanqui’ imperialism. In addition, these early student life experiences exposed him to other students who espoused the theories and ideas of Karl Marx. Later Ruz would use some of these theories to explain the development and fall of ancient Maya civilization.","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2012-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71062886","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}
In 2012 the Queensland Museum (QM) will be one hundred and fifty years old, the third oldest museum in Australia. Interestingly, the QM was probably the first museum in the country to begin to support, but not the first to ignore (or even suppress?), what we would consider today as something approaching prehistoric scientific archaeological research.
{"title":"Sydney B.J. Skertchly and the Early History of Pleistocene Archaeology at the Queensland Museum","authors":"Michael C. Westaway","doi":"10.5334/BHA.22114","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.22114","url":null,"abstract":"In 2012 the Queensland Museum (QM) will be one hundred and fifty years old, the third oldest museum in Australia. Interestingly, the QM was probably the first museum in the country to begin to support, but not the first to ignore (or even suppress?), what we would consider today as something approaching prehistoric scientific archaeological research.","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2012-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA.22114","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71062705","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}
Authenticity debates and charges of fraud are not infrequent within the world of archaeology. Depending on the importance of a chosen object, such discussions may reach the level and quality of courtroom rhetoric. Accusations may be hurled, back and forth, through scholarly chambers, and the question of guilt if the object is proven a fraud may be debated, fiercely, with or without considerable proof on either side. This article discusses the reception of two inscriptions, from late nineteenth century until the current date: the Latin Fibula Praenestina, from Praeneste (modern Palestrina), Italy, and the Kensington Rune Stone, from Kensington, Minnesota, USA. The fibula is said to date to the early seventh century BC, and the runic inscription itself mentions the date “1362”. However, shortly after their discovery, both of these inscriptions were accused of being forgeries. Their importance would be significant if they could be proven to be authentic. And yet there is continuing debate about their authenticity and their value to scholarship.
{"title":"The Consequences of Truth","authors":"K. Tikkanen","doi":"10.5334/BHA.22113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.22113","url":null,"abstract":"Authenticity debates and charges of fraud are not infrequent within the world of archaeology. Depending on the importance of a chosen object, such discussions may reach the level and quality of courtroom rhetoric. Accusations may be hurled, back and forth, through scholarly chambers, and the question of guilt if the object is proven a fraud may be debated, fiercely, with or without considerable proof on either side. This article discusses the reception of two inscriptions, from late nineteenth century until the current date: the Latin Fibula Praenestina, from Praeneste (modern Palestrina), Italy, and the Kensington Rune Stone, from Kensington, Minnesota, USA. The fibula is said to date to the early seventh century BC, and the runic inscription itself mentions the date “1362”. However, shortly after their discovery, both of these inscriptions were accused of being forgeries. Their importance would be significant if they could be proven to be authentic. And yet there is continuing debate about their authenticity and their value to scholarship.","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2012-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA.22113","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71062639","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}
{"title":"Magnus Fiskesjö and Chen Xingcan 2004 China Before China: Johan Gunnar Andersson, Ding Wenjiang and the Discovery of China’s Prehistory.","authors":"T. Murray","doi":"10.5334/BHA.22116","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.22116","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2012-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA.22116","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71062834","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}
In histories of archaeology, A.H.L.F. Pitt-Rivers and W.M.F. Petrie both have very prominent roles. It has long been known that the two were acquainted, leading many to assume that several key aspects of Petrie’s archaeological approaches were adopted directly from Pitt-Rivers. Few histories, however, have critically evaluated Petrie’s early archaeological work in the UK prior to his well-known endeavours in Egypt and Palestine. It is argued in this article that on doing so it becomes clear that the influence of Pitt-Rivers on Petrie has been overstated in the past. Moreover, a brief comparison of their approaches to fieldwork, to publication, to engagement with objects, and their views on museums, demonstrates more contrasts than similarities. In order to begin to evaluate Petrie’s disciplinary development this article considers some of the intellectual networks of late Victorian England as well as the social and economic contexts in which Petrie practised archaeology, which were to shape his methods independently of Pitt-Rivers.
{"title":"‘We Seem to be Working in the Same Line’: A.H.L.F. Pitt-Rivers and W.M.F. Petrie","authors":"Alice Stevenson","doi":"10.5334/BHA.22112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.22112","url":null,"abstract":"In histories of archaeology, A.H.L.F. Pitt-Rivers and W.M.F. Petrie both have very prominent roles. It has long been known that the two were acquainted, leading many to assume that several key aspects of Petrie’s archaeological approaches were adopted directly from Pitt-Rivers. Few histories, however, have critically evaluated Petrie’s early archaeological work in the UK prior to his well-known endeavours in Egypt and Palestine. It is argued in this article that on doing so it becomes clear that the influence of Pitt-Rivers on Petrie has been overstated in the past. Moreover, a brief comparison of their approaches to fieldwork, to publication, to engagement with objects, and their views on museums, demonstrates more contrasts than similarities. In order to begin to evaluate Petrie’s disciplinary development this article considers some of the intellectual networks of late Victorian England as well as the social and economic contexts in which Petrie practised archaeology, which were to shape his methods independently of Pitt-Rivers.","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2012-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA.22112","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71062164","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}
{"title":"Jan Albert Bakker 2010 Megalithic Research in the Netherlands, 1547-1911: From ‘Giant’s Beds’ and ‘Pillars of Hercules’ to Accurate Investigations.","authors":"M. Goodrum","doi":"10.5334/BHA.22115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.22115","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2012-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA.22115","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71062762","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}
{"title":"Robin Derricourt, 2011. Inventing Africa: History, Archaeology and Ideas.","authors":"P. Robertshaw","doi":"10.5334/BHA.2125","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.2125","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2011-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA.2125","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71062617","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}
{"title":"Reports and Announcements","authors":"T. Murray","doi":"10.5334/BHA.2126","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA.2126","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2011-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA.2126","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71062513","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：