导论:欧洲史前史与城市研究

IF 3.8 1区 历史学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Journal of World Prehistory Pub Date : 2017-07-24 DOI:10.1007/s10963-017-9104-9
Bisserka Gaydarska
{"title":"导论:欧洲史前史与城市研究","authors":"Bisserka Gaydarska","doi":"10.1007/s10963-017-9104-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The idea for this special issue arose out of a session on ‘Pre-Roman Urbanism in Eurasia’ at the conference of the European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) in Istanbul in 2014. This was preceded by an international symposium in Vienna in 2012 on proto-urbanization in Western Anatolia and neighbouring areas in the fourth millennium BC, and succeeded by two more conferences on early urbanism with special focus on Eurasia at the universities of Buffalo (April 2016) and Durham (May 2016). This healthy interest reflects an emerging research agenda inspired by exciting new (and not so new) discoveries, some of which form the focus of the following papers. It also brought a skeleton out of the closet, that of the troubled relationship between European prehistory and the emergence of urbanism, a problem with two aspects. The first is the tacit assumption that the first impulses of urban development might be expected to follow the same Asiatic trajectory as the preceding Neolithization of Europe. Thus, the Minoan ‘first-generation secondary states’ (Parkinson and Galaty 2007, p. 118) should be considered the earliest European examples. Despite the well-argued case that the Balkans were an independent centre of innovations (Renfrew 1969)—in the case of copper metallurgy, even preceding Anatolia (Kienlin 2010)—diffusionist models affect research agendas to this day. The second aspect of the problem stems from another deep-rooted prejudice, whereby an essentialized view of the Classical, primarily Mediterranean, town or oppidum denied a fair ‘urban’ hearing to any Iron Age set of evidence that apparently deviated from this norm (Moore et al. 2013; Fernandez-Gotz et al. 2014). One of the aims of this special issue is to question the validity of these long-held views on the basis of new evidence. Simply ignoring this evidence or branding these cases exceptions is no longer sustainable: the new straws have already broken the old camel’s back. The second aim of this special issue is to address the common misconception that, if a given settlement form was not sustained for long enough (and how long that is has not been clearly defined), then it probably did not contribute to the overall urbanism phenomenon. The flaw in this view has been demonstrated by the now well-documented ‘boom and bust’ pattern that existed alongside a more stable pattern during the EBA urbanization in the Fertile Crescent (Wilkinson et al. 2014). Other patterns of urbanization may involve cycles of centralization and decentralization (Fernandez-Gotz et al. 2014). Permanently occupied, long-term settlements were but one part of the urban narrative, albeit an important part. Looking at the wider context should reveal different trajectories of living together, even if some of these ended up in evolutionary culs-de-sac.","PeriodicalId":47061,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Prehistory","volume":"294 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction: European Prehistory and Urban Studies\",\"authors\":\"Bisserka Gaydarska\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10963-017-9104-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The idea for this special issue arose out of a session on ‘Pre-Roman Urbanism in Eurasia’ at the conference of the European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) in Istanbul in 2014. This was preceded by an international symposium in Vienna in 2012 on proto-urbanization in Western Anatolia and neighbouring areas in the fourth millennium BC, and succeeded by two more conferences on early urbanism with special focus on Eurasia at the universities of Buffalo (April 2016) and Durham (May 2016). This healthy interest reflects an emerging research agenda inspired by exciting new (and not so new) discoveries, some of which form the focus of the following papers. It also brought a skeleton out of the closet, that of the troubled relationship between European prehistory and the emergence of urbanism, a problem with two aspects. The first is the tacit assumption that the first impulses of urban development might be expected to follow the same Asiatic trajectory as the preceding Neolithization of Europe. Thus, the Minoan ‘first-generation secondary states’ (Parkinson and Galaty 2007, p. 118) should be considered the earliest European examples. Despite the well-argued case that the Balkans were an independent centre of innovations (Renfrew 1969)—in the case of copper metallurgy, even preceding Anatolia (Kienlin 2010)—diffusionist models affect research agendas to this day. The second aspect of the problem stems from another deep-rooted prejudice, whereby an essentialized view of the Classical, primarily Mediterranean, town or oppidum denied a fair ‘urban’ hearing to any Iron Age set of evidence that apparently deviated from this norm (Moore et al. 2013; Fernandez-Gotz et al. 2014). One of the aims of this special issue is to question the validity of these long-held views on the basis of new evidence. Simply ignoring this evidence or branding these cases exceptions is no longer sustainable: the new straws have already broken the old camel’s back. The second aim of this special issue is to address the common misconception that, if a given settlement form was not sustained for long enough (and how long that is has not been clearly defined), then it probably did not contribute to the overall urbanism phenomenon. The flaw in this view has been demonstrated by the now well-documented ‘boom and bust’ pattern that existed alongside a more stable pattern during the EBA urbanization in the Fertile Crescent (Wilkinson et al. 2014). Other patterns of urbanization may involve cycles of centralization and decentralization (Fernandez-Gotz et al. 2014). Permanently occupied, long-term settlements were but one part of the urban narrative, albeit an important part. Looking at the wider context should reveal different trajectories of living together, even if some of these ended up in evolutionary culs-de-sac.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of World Prehistory\",\"volume\":\"294 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"34\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of World Prehistory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10963-017-9104-9\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World Prehistory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10963-017-9104-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34

摘要

2014年,欧洲考古学家协会(EAA)在伊斯坦布尔举行了一次会议,主题是“欧亚大陆的前罗马城市主义”。在此之前,2012年在维也纳举行了一次国际研讨会,主题是公元前4000年安纳托利亚西部和邻近地区的原始城市化,随后在布法罗大学(2016年4月)和达勒姆大学(2016年5月)举行了两次关于早期城市化的会议,特别关注欧亚大陆。这种健康的兴趣反映了一种新兴的研究议程,受到令人兴奋的新发现(以及不那么新)的启发,其中一些发现构成了以下论文的重点。它也揭开了一件不可告人的秘密,那就是欧洲史前时期和城市化出现之间的复杂关系,这个问题有两个方面。首先是一种默认的假设,即城市发展的最初冲动可能会遵循与欧洲新石器时代之前相同的亚洲轨迹。因此,米诺斯人的“第一代二级国家”(Parkinson and galati2007, p. 118)应该被认为是最早的欧洲例子。尽管巴尔干半岛是一个独立的创新中心(Renfrew 1969)——在铜冶金方面,甚至早于安纳托利亚(Kienlin 2010)——扩散主义模型至今仍影响着研究议程。问题的第二个方面源于另一个根深蒂固的偏见,即对古典的、主要是地中海的城镇或鸦片的本质化观点,拒绝对任何明显偏离这一规范的铁器时代的证据进行公平的“城市”听证(Moore et al. 2013;Fernandez-Gotz et al. 2014)。本期特刊的目的之一是在新证据的基础上质疑这些长期持有的观点的有效性。简单地忽视这些证据或将这些案件归为例外已不再是可持续的:新的稻草已经压断了旧骆驼的脊背。本期特刊的第二个目的是解决一个普遍的误解,即如果一种特定的聚落形式持续的时间不够长(具体持续了多长时间还没有明确定义),那么它可能不会导致整体的城市化现象。这种观点的缺陷已经被现在有充分证据的“繁荣与萧条”模式所证明,这种模式在新月沃地的EBA城市化期间与更稳定的模式一起存在(Wilkinson et al. 2014)。其他城市化模式可能涉及集中和分散的循环(Fernandez-Gotz et al. 2014)。被永久占领的长期定居点只是城市叙事的一部分,尽管是重要的一部分。从更大的背景来看,应该会揭示出共同生活的不同轨迹,即使其中一些最终走向了进化的死胡同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Introduction: European Prehistory and Urban Studies
The idea for this special issue arose out of a session on ‘Pre-Roman Urbanism in Eurasia’ at the conference of the European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) in Istanbul in 2014. This was preceded by an international symposium in Vienna in 2012 on proto-urbanization in Western Anatolia and neighbouring areas in the fourth millennium BC, and succeeded by two more conferences on early urbanism with special focus on Eurasia at the universities of Buffalo (April 2016) and Durham (May 2016). This healthy interest reflects an emerging research agenda inspired by exciting new (and not so new) discoveries, some of which form the focus of the following papers. It also brought a skeleton out of the closet, that of the troubled relationship between European prehistory and the emergence of urbanism, a problem with two aspects. The first is the tacit assumption that the first impulses of urban development might be expected to follow the same Asiatic trajectory as the preceding Neolithization of Europe. Thus, the Minoan ‘first-generation secondary states’ (Parkinson and Galaty 2007, p. 118) should be considered the earliest European examples. Despite the well-argued case that the Balkans were an independent centre of innovations (Renfrew 1969)—in the case of copper metallurgy, even preceding Anatolia (Kienlin 2010)—diffusionist models affect research agendas to this day. The second aspect of the problem stems from another deep-rooted prejudice, whereby an essentialized view of the Classical, primarily Mediterranean, town or oppidum denied a fair ‘urban’ hearing to any Iron Age set of evidence that apparently deviated from this norm (Moore et al. 2013; Fernandez-Gotz et al. 2014). One of the aims of this special issue is to question the validity of these long-held views on the basis of new evidence. Simply ignoring this evidence or branding these cases exceptions is no longer sustainable: the new straws have already broken the old camel’s back. The second aim of this special issue is to address the common misconception that, if a given settlement form was not sustained for long enough (and how long that is has not been clearly defined), then it probably did not contribute to the overall urbanism phenomenon. The flaw in this view has been demonstrated by the now well-documented ‘boom and bust’ pattern that existed alongside a more stable pattern during the EBA urbanization in the Fertile Crescent (Wilkinson et al. 2014). Other patterns of urbanization may involve cycles of centralization and decentralization (Fernandez-Gotz et al. 2014). Permanently occupied, long-term settlements were but one part of the urban narrative, albeit an important part. Looking at the wider context should reveal different trajectories of living together, even if some of these ended up in evolutionary culs-de-sac.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: Aims and scopeJournal of World Prehistory is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed, original treatments of the prehistory of an area or larger region. It was founded nearly thirty years ago with the remit of providing researchers, instructors and students with timely and authoritative research syntheses from all fields of archaeology. Journal of World Prehistory continues to lead in this field. Our classic articles may be 20,000 or 25,000 words long, as appropriate (excluding their extensive bibliographies). Since 2008 they have been joined by shorter (around 10,000 words), position pieces, which provide in-depth, thoughtful development of data and concepts, including interventions in controversies that unfold in our pages. These, written in a fashion interesting and accessible to all archaeologists, are often paired with a longer treatment in a single volume. In addition, readers now benefit from thematic special issues and double issues, in which a number of leading authors deal with a key theme in world prehistory, such as the origins of metallurgy (2009, volumes 22: 3 and 4), or the East Asian Neolithic (2013, in preparation). All papers are available first online, followed by the print edition. We aim to be truly global in coverage, with recent articles dealing, inter alia, with Amazonian lithics, the late Jomon of Hokkaido, the Bronze Age in Southeast Asia, the Neanderthal settlement of Doggerland, Neolithic networks in Western Asia, younger Dryas Paleo-Indian adaptations, and state formation in the Horn of Africa. Articles benefit from multi-language abstracts where appropriate, and we work closely with authors who do not have English as a first language to present major syntheses in a clear and concise way to an international audience. Traditionally, JWP focuses on earlier periods, but it includes the beginnings and early development of complex societies, and our understanding of ‘prehistory’ is broad and inclusive: for guidance on chronological scope, as well as our calendrical conventions, see the editorial article ‘Prehistory vs. Archaeology: terms of Engagement’ http://www.springerlink.com/content/346142p032604447/ Our unique remit means that we do not encourage the submission of unsolicited papers; rather, specific proposals are encouraged and then guided prior to independent peer review. Our aims and the way we fulfil them, with close contact with authors throughout the publication process, mean that JWP is not a venue for the simple and rapid dissemination of new results. Whilst we expect scholarship to be current, with syntheses including much new data, our readers look to us for definitive area/period coverage that will have continuing value.If you are proposing an article or special theme for Journal of World Prehistory, please read the Instructions for authors.Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH)?Journal of World Prehistory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.htmlRated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List. For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm
期刊最新文献
Ivories in the Late Chalcolithic Period and Their Significance for Understanding Contacts Between Egypt and the Southern Levant Circulation of Goods and Information in Southern Patagonia During the Late Holocene: An Integrated Analysis of Engravings and Black Obsidian Artefacts Salt Mining and Salt Miners at Talkherud–Douzlākh, Northwestern Iran: From Landscape to Resource-Scape Prehistory to History: A New Archaeological Approach to Knowledge Transmission and the Inception of Literacy in Central Europe Patrilocality at the Beginning of Farming? An Isotopic Approach from SE Moravia
×
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