Advertisement

Commentary

Chapter

Abstract

Fieldwork is at the heart of archaeological endeavour. Periodically archaeological theorists remember this and consider the questions of how and why we do fieldwork (e.g. Andrews et al. 2000; Chadwick 1998, 2003; Hodder 1997, 2000). And fieldwork changes, occasionally in response to these thoughts, but more commonly as result of changes in the structure of the discipline, funding, technology. These papers provide a welcome exploration of where these two things meet: theoretical consideration and the experience of changing practice.

Keywords

Field Practice Cultural Resource Management Archaeological Project Archaeological Information Field Archaeologist 
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. Adams, M., and Brooke, C., 1995. Unmanaging the past: truth, data and the human being. Norwegian Archaeological Review 28/2:91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aitchison, K., 2004. Supply, demand and a failure of understanding: addressing the culture clash between archaeologists’ expectations for training and employment in ‘academia’ versus ‘practice’. World Archaeology 36/2:203–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrews, G., Barrett, J. C., & Lewis, J. S. C., 2000. Interpretation not Record: The Practice of Archaeology. Antiquity 74:525–530Google Scholar
  4. BAJR Federation 2011 Ryszard Bartowiak Images of excavation teams 70s and 80s BAJR Federation Forum www.bajrfed.co.uk/contentphp?325-Ryszard-Bartowiak-Images-of-excavation-teams-70s-and-80s
  5. Binford, Lewis R.1983 In Pursuit of the Past: Decoding the Archaeological Record. New York: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
  6. Bradley, R. 2006 Bridging the two cultures. Commercial archaeology and the study of Prehistoric Britain. Antiquaries Journal 86:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carmen, J. 2006. Digging the Dirt: Excavation as Social Practice. In Ethnographies of Archaeological Practice: Cultural Encounters, Material Transformations, edited by M. Edgeworth. 95–102. Altimera Press. Lanham.Google Scholar
  8. Chadwick, A., 1998. Archaeology at the edge of chaos: further toward reflexive excavation methodologies. Assemblage 3 http://www.shef.ac.uk/∼assem/3/3chad.htm
  9. Chadwick, A., 2003. Post-processualism, professionalization and archaeological methodologies. Towards reflective and radical practice. Archaeological Dialogues 10/1:97–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cross, S., Attewell, B., Cripps, P., Cromwell, T. Crosby, V., Graham, K., Heathcote, J., Jones, C., Lyons, E., May, K., Payne, A., Reilly, S., Robinson, D.E., Stonell Walker, K., Walkden, M., 2004 Revelation: Phase 1 Assessment 78/2004 CfA Report Series.Google Scholar
  11. Cross May, S. and Crosby V. 2010 “Holy Grail or Poison Chalice: Challenges in implementing digital excavation recording” in M Forte et al 2005 Beyond the Artefact: Digital Interpretation of the Past: CAA 2004. Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology. Proceedings of the 32nd conference, Vienna, Austria, April 2003. edited by (with Vicky Crosby)Google Scholar
  12. Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). 2010 Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/pps5 [accessed 23 April 2011].
  13. Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). 2011 Draft National Planning Policy Framework http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/draftframework [accessed 1 September 2011].
  14. Edgeworth, M. (ed.) 2006. Ethnographies of archaeological practice: cultural encounters, material transformations. Lanham: Altimira PressGoogle Scholar
  15. English Heritage 2006. Management of Research Projects in the Historic Environment: The MoRPHE Project Managers’ Guide. English Heritage, London.Google Scholar
  16. Hodder, I. 1997. Always momentary, fluid and flexible: towards a reflexive excavation methodology. Antiquity 71, 691–700.Google Scholar
  17. Hodder, I. (ed.) 2000. Towards reflexive method in archaeology : the example at Çatalhöyük : y members of the Çatalhöyük team. Cambridge: McDonald Institute.Google Scholar
  18. Lefebvre, H., Kofman, E., & Lebas, E. 1996. Writings on Cities. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.Google Scholar
  19. Pitt-Rivers, A. L.-F.1892 Excavations in Cranborne Chase, near Rushmore, on the borders of Dorset and Wilts. Vol. III: Excavations in Bokerly and Wansdyke, Dorset and Wilts. 1888–1891. Privately printed [Harrison and Sons], London.Google Scholar
  20. Shirky, C. 2003 Social Software and the Politics of Groups, “Networks, Economics and Culture” http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_politics.html
  21. Willelms, W., and van den Dries, M. 2007, The origins and development of quality assurance in archaeology. In Quality Management in Archaeology, edited by W. J. H. Willems and M. H. van den Dries pp 35–49. Oxbow, Oxford.Google Scholar
  22. Yamin, R. and Masso, A D. 1996 The River, the Dutch, the District, and the Corporate Giant: New Brunswick and the Past. In Unearthing the Invisible Colony: Historical Archaeology in New Jersey, edited by Rebecca Yamin. A special issue of New Jersey History 114(3–4): 11–31.Google Scholar
  23. Yarrow, T. 2003. Artefactual Persons: the relational capacities of persons and things in the practice of excavation. Norwegian Archaeological Review 36: 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.English HeritageFort CumberlandSouthseaUK

Personalised recommendations