第八章格伦·A·布莱克与大遗址大科学遗产考古的客观性问题

Melody K. Pope
{"title":"第八章格伦·A·布莱克与大遗址大科学遗产考古的客观性问题","authors":"Melody K. Pope","doi":"10.1111/apaa.12175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Large-scale excavations in the first half of the twentieth century conducted by Glenn A. Black at Angel Mounds were viewed as moving archaeology away from its antiquarian roots toward legitimate scientific practice. Although this transformation led to innovative field methods, amassed collections of unprecedented size and depth, and created foundational archaeological programs and knowledge, the past and the peoples who occupied it became increasingly objectified and marginalized. How did archaeological practice on such an expansive scale remove from history the people whose heritage is memorialized at a national historic landmark? And how has this history impacted archaeological practice today? To address these questions, I draw on personal letters and published accounts for insights into the interests and problematic aspects of Black's archaeological practices before turning to a consideration of some present-day continuities, challenges, and ways forward. The issues and biases revealed in the case of Black's early 20<sup>th</sup> century archaeological praxis are not unique for the time. Nonetheless, underlying problems of objectification and racism challenge us to not only confront legacy biases and the harm they have caused, but to work toward ethical ways to use such collections now and in the future.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100116,"journal":{"name":"Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association","volume":"34 1","pages":"92-106"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chapter 8 Glenn A. Black and the Problems of Objectification in Big Site-Big Science Legacy Archaeology\",\"authors\":\"Melody K. Pope\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/apaa.12175\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Large-scale excavations in the first half of the twentieth century conducted by Glenn A. Black at Angel Mounds were viewed as moving archaeology away from its antiquarian roots toward legitimate scientific practice. Although this transformation led to innovative field methods, amassed collections of unprecedented size and depth, and created foundational archaeological programs and knowledge, the past and the peoples who occupied it became increasingly objectified and marginalized. How did archaeological practice on such an expansive scale remove from history the people whose heritage is memorialized at a national historic landmark? And how has this history impacted archaeological practice today? To address these questions, I draw on personal letters and published accounts for insights into the interests and problematic aspects of Black's archaeological practices before turning to a consideration of some present-day continuities, challenges, and ways forward. The issues and biases revealed in the case of Black's early 20<sup>th</sup> century archaeological praxis are not unique for the time. Nonetheless, underlying problems of objectification and racism challenge us to not only confront legacy biases and the harm they have caused, but to work toward ethical ways to use such collections now and in the future.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100116,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"92-106\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apaa.12175\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apaa.12175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

二十世纪上半叶,格伦·A·布莱克在天使丘进行的大规模发掘被视为将考古学从其古董根源转向合法的科学实践。尽管这一转变带来了创新的实地方法,积累了前所未有的规模和深度的藏品,并创造了基础性的考古项目和知识,但过去和占领它的人民变得越来越物化和边缘化。如此大规模的考古实践是如何将那些在国家历史地标上纪念其遗产的人从历史中抹去的?这段历史对今天的考古实践产生了怎样的影响?为了解决这些问题,我利用个人信件和已发表的报道,深入了解布莱克考古实践的兴趣和问题,然后再考虑当今的一些连续性、挑战和前进方向。布莱克20世纪早期考古实践中揭示的问题和偏见在当时并不是独一无二的。尽管如此,客观化和种族主义的根本问题不仅挑战我们直面遗留偏见及其造成的伤害,而且挑战我们努力以合乎道德的方式在现在和未来使用这些藏品。
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
Chapter 8 Glenn A. Black and the Problems of Objectification in Big Site-Big Science Legacy Archaeology

Large-scale excavations in the first half of the twentieth century conducted by Glenn A. Black at Angel Mounds were viewed as moving archaeology away from its antiquarian roots toward legitimate scientific practice. Although this transformation led to innovative field methods, amassed collections of unprecedented size and depth, and created foundational archaeological programs and knowledge, the past and the peoples who occupied it became increasingly objectified and marginalized. How did archaeological practice on such an expansive scale remove from history the people whose heritage is memorialized at a national historic landmark? And how has this history impacted archaeological practice today? To address these questions, I draw on personal letters and published accounts for insights into the interests and problematic aspects of Black's archaeological practices before turning to a consideration of some present-day continuities, challenges, and ways forward. The issues and biases revealed in the case of Black's early 20th century archaeological praxis are not unique for the time. Nonetheless, underlying problems of objectification and racism challenge us to not only confront legacy biases and the harm they have caused, but to work toward ethical ways to use such collections now and in the future.

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
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Chapter 7. Mapping land use with integrated environmental archaeological datasets Finding Fields: The Archaeology of Agricultural Landscapes Chapter 1. The state of the field: Emerging approaches to the archaeology of agricultural landscapes Chapter 2. Stone by stone: Women's quotidian farm labor and the construction of the Khutwaneng farmscape in Bokoni, South Africa Chapter 8. Isotopic evidence for protohistoric field locations in northeastern Illinois
×
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