Advertisement

Contemporary Polish Archaeology in Global Context

  • Arkadiusz Marciniak
Chapter

Abstract

I discuss major developments and challenges in archaeological academic research, archaeological heritage protection and management, public engagement in cultural heritage preservation and conservation programs. In principle, the presented challenges relate to socioeconomic conditions of archaeological work in contemporary Poland. Although archaeology in Poland has long tradition, I specifically focus on the impact that social, economic, and political changes have made on the archeological practice in Poland within the last 20 years, that is, after the revolution of 1989 and the fall of communism in Eastern Europe. The transition to market economy affected all aspects of archaeological practice. My discussion incorporates both local and global scales as I briefly discuss Polish archaeology and its involvement in European and world archaeology.

Keywords

Archaeological Site Heritage Management World Archaeology Archaeological Practice Archaeological Heritage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Abramowicz, Andrzej. 1991. Historia archeologii polskiej, XIX i XX wiek. Instytut Historii Kultury Materialnej Polskiej Akademii Nauk: Warszawa.Google Scholar
  2. Barford, Paul M. 1993. Paradigms lost. Polish archaeology and post-War politics. Archaeologia Polona 31: 257–270.Google Scholar
  3. Barford, Paul M. and Zbigniew, Kobyliński. 1998. Protecting the archaeological heritage in Poland at the end of the 1990s. In Hensel, Witold, Stanisław Tabaczyński & Przemysław Urbańczyk (eds.), Theory and practice of archaeological research. Volume III. Dialogue with the data. The archaeology of complex societies and its context in the ‘90s, 461–482. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences: Warsaw.Google Scholar
  4. Bauman, Zygmunt. 1993. Rewolucje pożerają ojców. Polityka 16, pp. 21.Google Scholar
  5. Bertemes, François. 2002. Die mitteldeutsche Archäologie. Eine Standortdestimmung zwischen Ost und West, In Biehl, Peter, Alexander Gramsch, and Arkadiusz Marciniak (eds.), Archaeologies of Europe. History, Methods and Theories, 99–118. Waxman: Münster.Google Scholar
  6. Biehl, Peter, Alexander Gramsch, and Arkadiusz Marciniak. 2002. Archaeologies of Europe: Histories and identities. An introduction. In Biehl, Peter, Alexander Gramsch, and Arkadiusz Marciniak (eds.), Archaeologies of Europe. History, Methods and Theories, 25–31. Waxman: Münster.Google Scholar
  7. Bloemers, J.H.F. 2002. German archaeology at risk? A neighbour’s critical review of tradition, structure and serendipity, In Härke, Heinrich (ed.), Archaeology, ideology and society. The German experience. 2nd revised edition, 378–399. Peter Lang: Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  8. Brzeziński, Wojciech. 1998. Museum archaeology and the protection of the archaeological heritage in Poland. In Hensel, Witold, Stanisław Tabaczyński & Przemysław Urbańczyk (eds.), Theory and practice of archaeological research. Volume III. Dialogue with the data. The archaeology of complex societies and its context in the ‘90s, 496–503. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences: Warsaw.Google Scholar
  9. Brzeziński, Wojciech. 2001. Archaeology in the museum. Presenting the past to the general public. In Kobyliński, Zbigniew (ed.), Quo vadis archaeologia? Whither European archaeology in the 21st century? 181–190. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences: Warsaw.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, Daniel. 2006. Globalization and Its Enemies. MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  11. Fairclough, Grahame, and Per Grau Møller, P.G. (eds.), 2008. Landscape as Heritage. The Management and Protection of Landscape in Europe, a summary by the COST A27 project “Landmarks”. Geographia Bernensia G79, Bern.Google Scholar
  12. Godłowski, Kazimierz. 2000. Spór o Słowian. In Parczewski, Michał (ed.), Pierwotne siedziby Słowian. Wybór pism pod redakcją Michała Parczewskiego, 345–369, Instytut Archeologii Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego: Kraków.Google Scholar
  13. Härke, Heinrich, 1991. All quiet on the Western front? Paradigms, methods and approaches in West German archaeology. In Hodder, Ian (ed.), Archaeological theory in Europe. The last three decades, 187–222. Routledge: London & New York.Google Scholar
  14. Härke, Heinrich (ed.), 2000: Archaeology, ideology and society. The German experience. Peter Lang: Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  15. Härke, Heinrich. 2002. The German experience. In Härke, Heinrich (ed.), Archaeology, ideology and society. The German experience. 2nd revised edition, 13–40. Peter Lang: Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  16. Hodder, Ian. 1991. Archaeological theory in contemporary European societies. The emergence of competing traditions. In Hodder, Ian (ed.), Archaeological theory in Europe. The last three decades, 1–24. Routledge: London & New York.Google Scholar
  17. Kadrow, Sławomir. 2008. The German influence on Polish archaeology. In Gramsch, Alexander & Urlike, Sommer (eds.), A History of Central European Archaeology. Theory, Methods and Politics (in press).Google Scholar
  18. Kobyliński, Zbigniew. 2001a. Quo vadis archaeologia? Introductory remarks. In Kobyliński, Zbigniew (ed.), Quo vadis archaeologia? Whither European archaeology in the 21st century? 17–20. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences: Warsaw.Google Scholar
  19. Kobyliński, Zbigniew. 2001b. Archaeological sources and archaeological heritage. New vision of the subject matter of archaeology. In Kobyliński, Zbigniew (ed.), Quo vadis archaeologia? Whither European archaeology in the 21st century?, 76–82. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences: Warsaw.Google Scholar
  20. Kobyliński, Zbigniew. 2002. Archaeology on the ruins of ivory towers. What sort of theory do we need? In Biehl, Peter, Alexander, Gramsch, and Arkadiusz, Marciniak (eds.), Archaeologies of Europe. History, Methods and Theories, 421–424. Waxman: Münster.Google Scholar
  21. Kokowski, Andrzej. 2002. Etnogeneza Słowian. Rzeczywistość badawcza – emocje – odbiór społeczny. In Kokowski, Andrzej (ed.), Cień Światowita, 87–170. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej: Lublin.Google Scholar
  22. Kruk, Janusz. 1973. Studia osadnicze nad neolitem wyżyn lessowych. Zakład im. Ossolińskich: Wrocław.Google Scholar
  23. Kruk, Janusz. 1980. Gospodarka w Polsce południowo-wschodniej w V–III tysiącleciu p.n.e. Zakład im. Ossolińskich: Wrocław.Google Scholar
  24. Lech, Jacek. 1997: Małowierni. Spór wokół marksizmu w archeologii polskiej lat 1945–1975. Archeologia Polski 42: 175–232.Google Scholar
  25. Lech, Jacek. 1997–98. Between captivity and freedom. Polish archaeology in the 20th century. Archaeologia Polona 35–36: 25–222.Google Scholar
  26. Londen van, Heleen, Marjolin Kok and Arkadiusz Marciniak (eds.). 2009: E-learning archaeology. Theory and practice. University of Amsterdam: Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  27. Lozny, Ludomir. 1998. Public archaeology or archaeology for the public? In Hensel, Witold, Stanisław Tabaczyński & Przemysław Urbańczyk (eds.), Theory and practice of archaeological research. Volume III. Dialogue with the data. The archaeology of complex societies and its context in the ‘90s, 431–459. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology Polish Academy of Sciences: Warsaw.Google Scholar
  28. Lozny, Ludomir. 2002. Far outside, looking in. Polish archaeology and looking-glass self. Archaeologia Polona 40: 137–148.Google Scholar
  29. Marciniak, Arkadiusz. 2006. Central European archaeology at the crossroads. In Layton, Robert, Stephen Shennan & Peter Stone (eds.), A Future for Archaeology. The Past in the Present, 157–171. UCL Press: London.Google Scholar
  30. Marciniak, Arkadiusz and Włodzimierz, Rączkowski. 1991. The development of archaeological theory in Poland under conditions of isolation. World Archaeological Bulletin 5: 57–65.Google Scholar
  31. Minta-Tworzowska, Danuta. 2002. Between a community of inspiration and the separateness of archaeological traditions. In Biehl, Peter, Alexander, Gramsch, and Arkadiusz, Marciniak (eds.), Archaeologies of Europe. History, Methods and Theories, 54–64. Waxman: Münster.Google Scholar
  32. Minta-Tworzowska, Danuta and Włodzimierz, Rączkowski. 1996. Theoretical traditions in contemporary Polish archaeology World Archaeological Bulletin 8: 196–209.Google Scholar
  33. Naglik, Ryszard. 2005. Archaeological motorway. Archeologia Żywa, Special issue: 37–44.Google Scholar
  34. Parczewski, Michał. 2005. Podstawy lokalizacji pierwotnych siedzib Słowian. In Kaczanowski, Piotr and Michał, Parczewski (eds.), Archeologia o początkach Słowian, 65–78. Księgarnia Akademicka: Kraków.Google Scholar
  35. Piontek, Janusz. 1993. Rekonstrukcja historycznego procesu etnogenezy Słowian. Model adaptacyjny. Folia Praehistorica Posnaniensia 5: 13–36.Google Scholar
  36. Piontek, Janusz. 2006. Etnogeneza Słowian w świetle nowszych badań antropologicznych. Slavia Antiqua 47, s. 161–189.Google Scholar
  37. Rączkowski, Włodzimierz. 1996. “Drang nach westen”? Polish archaeology and national identity. In Diaz-Andreu, Margarita and Timothy, Champion (eds.), Nationalism and archaeology in Europe, 187–217. Westview Press: London.Google Scholar
  38. Sommer, Ulrike and Alexander, Gramsch. 2008. German archaeology in context. An introduction to history and present of Central European archaeology. In Gramsch, Alexander and Urlike, Sommer (eds), A History of Central European Archaeology. Theory, Methods and Politics (in press).Google Scholar
  39. Tabaczyński, Stanisław. 2001. Archeologia na progu XXI wieku. In Jacek, Lech (ed.), Archeologia na progu III tysiąclecia, 39–51. Komitet Nauk Pra-i Protohistorycznych PAN: Warszawa.Google Scholar
  40. Tabaczyński, Stanisław. 2002. From the history of eastern and western archaeological thought. An introduction to discussion. In Biehl, Peter, Alexander, Gramsch, and Arkadiusz, Marciniak (eds.), Archaeologies of Europe. History, Methods and Theories, 67–76. Waxman: Münster.Google Scholar
  41. Wiślański, Tadeusz. 1979. Kształtowanie się miejscowych kultur rolniczo-hodowlanych. Plemiona kultury pucharów lejkowatych. In Hensel, Witold and Tadeusz, Wiślański (eds.), Prahistoria ziem polskich, t. 2, Neolit, 261–299. Zakład im. Ossolińskich: Wrocław.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Adam Mickiewicz UniversityPoznanPoland

Personalised recommendations