National Archaeology Research Articles

Preparing the Romanian National Archaeological Datasets for ARIADNE

The contribution of the Romanian National Institute of Heritage (NIH) to the ARIADNE catalogue consists of 22,298 cultural resources, 18,277 of which are archaeological sites and 4021 are fieldwork reports. The two types of data were extracted from the two repositories that INP manages: the National Archaeological Repertory and the Chronicle of Archaeological Research. In Romania, the legislation regarding the protection of archaeological heritage establishes the National Archaeological Repertory as the means of managing the scientific data relating to the archaeological heritage, and of mapping archaeological sites as well as the threats to them. In addition, the same legislation stipulates that preliminary excavation reports should be published in a volume edited by the National Archaeology Commission, if the research was financed by public funds. As a result, for better dissemination, the reports are uploaded to a database. Both the Repertory and the Chronicle are accessible online through the INP management web portal. In order to fulfil the NIH's obligations within the ARIADNEplus project, several corrections and changes were made to the structures of both repositories (RAN and Chronicle) and data had to be updated. First of all, a photo upload module that illustrates both an archaeological site, perceived as a landscape, and its various components was developed. At the same time, the NIH team carried out a campaign to map the archaeological sites using coordinates in the WGS84 system, using various cartographic resources, such as topographic maps, aerial photographs and satellite images. The third activity consisted of creating a hierarchical list of archaeological site types and their components to support a more accurate description and retrieval of database records. Conversion of the RAN archaeological records to AO-Cat compliant RDF data was the fourth activity conducted by NIIH in order to include the RAN records in the ARIADNE Knowledge Base. Subsequently, a hierarchical list of the archaeological periods used in Romanian archaeology was developed, where every period is described by three main components: name, time interval and geographical area. This list has been converted to the PeriodO format and will be imported into the gazetteer.

Introduction to Special issue

Introduction to Special issue

ИСТОРИЯ ОТДЕЛА АРХЕОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЙ ИНСТИТУТА ИСТОРИИ, ЯЗЫКА И ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ УФИЦ РАН

The first archaeological research at the IHLL UFRC RAS was conducted in 1953. Already in 1959, an independent sector of archeology and ethnography of the IHLL was created. Subsequently, an independent department of archaeology was allocated. Currently, the Department of Archaeological research is successfully functioning in the IHLL, continuing the scientific directions and traditions laid down by its predecessors. Over the almost 70year period of the activity of archeology, the IHLL has made a worthy contribution to the national archaeology. In Bashkortostan, the ancient settlement in the center of the capital of the republic - Ufa-2 is well known. It was discovered and introduced into scientific circulation by the staff of the IHLL. The collection of Sarmatian gold from the Filippovka mounds, obtained by the IHLL archaeological expedition, has gained worldwide fame. The staff of the Department of Archaeological Research continues to study the monument of international significance - the Shulgan-Tash cave. The results of their research are regularly published by the IHLL archaeologists in the leading scientific publications of Russia, as well as in the Ufa Archaeological Herald published by the Department of Archaeological Research.

Обработка трехмерных моделей археологических артефактов

This article provides a detailed account of the process of scanning, post-processing and further manipulation of three-dimensional models obtained with structured light scanners. Purpose. The purpose of the study is determined by the need for national archaeologists to learn the methods of three-dimensional modeling for the implementation of scientific research corresponding to international standards. Unfortunately, this direction in national archaeology began to develop in a relatively recent time and there is a lag in the application of three-dimensional modeling of national archaeology compared to the world level. Results. Any archaeological, experimental or ethnographic artifact can be used for three-dimensional scanning. To perform post-processing of three-dimensional models it is necessary to carry out primary scanning of an artifact by one of the existing algorithms. The algorithm for creating models, their positioning, simplification, saving in various formats and export is described. The main sequence of 3D models post-processing includes: processing of groups of scanned projections (their cleaning and alignment), creation of artifact model and processing/rectification of the resulting model using special software. Conclusion. As a result of correct implementation of the algorithm, the researcher receives a scaled model completely corresponding to the original artifact. Obtaining a scalable, texture-free three-dimensional model of the artifact, which fully corresponds to the original and exceeds a photograph in the quality of detail transfer, allows a scientist to conduct precise metric measurements and any procedures of non-invasive manipulation of the models. The ability to access a database of three-dimensional models of archaeological collections greatly simplifies the work of archaeologists, especially in situations when country borders are closed.

Surgimento e consolidação da Semana Internacional de Arqueologia Discentes MAE/USP: uma reflexão

Este artigo discute e reflete sobre a criação e consolidação da Semana Internacional de Arqueologia Discentes MAE/USP (SIA), que surgiu em 2007 e passou a ocorrer com frequência bianual. Organizada de forma aberta e colaborativa por discentes do Museu, a SIA se tornou um espaço de articulação, troca de conhecimentos e experiências, que desempenha um papel fundamental na formação de futuros profissionais engajados com a ciência e a gestão do patrimônio arqueológico no cenário nacional da Arqueologia. Ao longo das várias edições, o evento se profissionalizou e ganhou a marca internacional, com a criação de um protocolo dinâmico e democrático para que estudantes possam exercer trabalhos conjuntos e de maior inserção institucional. Uma organização feita por discentes e voltada para pessoas interessadas em geral, a SIA potencializou seu espírito aberto e o diálogo crescente com os diferentes coletivos humanos que vem demandando novas práticas e posturas do fazer arqueológico. Por meio de entrevistas, questionários, análises da documentação e nossa experiência pessoal, trazemos aqui um olhar sobre a história da SIA e seu papel na trajetória acadêmica de discentes e no Museu como um todo. Esperamos que essa reflexão possa contribuir com o estímulo para a continuidade e surgimento de outros eventos semelhantes pelo país.

Таманская экспедиция ГАИМК: к истории создания

This paper discusses the questions concerned with the Taman Expedition of the State Academy of the History of Material Culture (GAIMK) headed by Aleksandr A. Miller. Notwithstanding the ever-increasing number of publications devoted to the history of the national archaeology during the 1920s–1930s, many of its moments still remain unknown. This is true, inter alia, concerning the history of the organization and activities of the Taman Expedi- tion in 1930.

Bentuk Hias Tembikar Di Wilayah Sumbagsel: Kunduran, Lolo Gedang, dan Muak Ornamental Shape Pottery In The Southern Sumatera Region: Lolo Gedang, Muak, and Kunduran

Abstract. Pottery is a tool made by hands with special skills. Pottery one of the cultural results that began to be known at the time of cultivation in Indonesia. Pottery is a fragile item, because the ingredients and the manufacturing process produce goods that have limited endurance in their use. The varying needs of pottery also indicate the diversity of forms made of produced. Pottery artifacts are often found on archaological sites, either intact or broken in an occasional amount, and are the most dominant artifact findings among other artefact findings. From pottery data may be revealed some aspects of human life supporters, both the maker and the wearer. Research that has been done by archaeology center of south sumatera and the center of national archaeology research and development in sumbagsel region found many decorative pottery such as Kunduran Site, Lolo Gedang, and Muak. From Kunduran 9 decorative pottery, Lolo Gedang 41 decorated pottery, and Muak 11 decorated pottery.

Archaeology and the State We’re In: Defining a Role for Historic England in the Archaeological Practice of the Twenty-First Century

The conduct of archaeology in England has changed radically over the last quarter century, particularly as a result of the introduction of development-led funding. It continues to evolve, not least because of the significant – and in all probability permanent – reductions that have occurred in the UK’s public expenditure since 2007–2008. Further change may be anticipated as a result of the UK’s exit from the European Union. The creation of Historic England in 2015 has offered an opportunity to review its future role in a national archaeology that is now dominated by the commercial sector, with all the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats that this involves. This article summarises the outcomes of our review and the way Historic England’s approaches to archaeological practice will develop as a result. It also provides a more personal perspective on the background to those deliberations. During the review process, Historic England was aware that others were also considering the future of the discipline from different vantage points. These commentators included the British Academy, which chose to address archaeology in the second of its Reflections on Disciplines exercises, and various European archaeologists who were engaged in debate over practice models with differing degrees of state control or commercial freedom.

Институт археологии и искусствознания РАНИОН в судьбах отечественной археологии

Институт археологии и искусствознания РАНИОН в судьбах отечественной археологии

Is there an alternative to the nation state?

AbstractAcademic developments, migration and other forces of globalization have ruptured the validity of traditional national and ethnic archaeology in the Scandinavian states. However, this does not mean that the relationship between nation states and archaeology has come to an end. In reference to Norway, this article contends that on a practical level there is no viable alternative to replace the nation state. In terms of archaeological narratives, it is more relevant to adapt archaeological narratives to the evolving state than to advocate abandoning the nation state altogether.

Social and Political Factors in Post-Colonial Indian Archaeology: The Case of Sanghol, Punjab

In this paper, I present the case of Sanghol, Punjab, in Indian archaeology to highlight the influence of social and political factors on the interpretation of archaeological data and the preservation of cultural heritage. Using a geographic approach, I show how geopolitical tensions and the desire for internal political stability influenced archaeological practices in post-colonial India. In the aftermath of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination in 1984, local archaeological investigations in Sanghol, located 200 kilometres from the sensitive Pakistan-India frontline, piqued the interest of the Archaeological Survey of India, the national department for archaeology and heritage management. The Survey subsequently carried out collaborative field studies in Sanghol between 1986 and 1990, reflecting the changing relationship between the local community and the national government at a time of intense political uncertainty. I argue that there is greater competition and collaboration between knowledge producers in Indian archaeology than has been accepted. This, in turn, impacts our understanding of the practice of national archaeology.

Henri Hubert et l’archéologie de l’Asie du Sud-Est. Un moment de formation personnelle et d’échanges intellectuels

Henri Hubert became attracted to Far Eastern archaeology and anthropology early in his carrier. In this connection, he soon engaged in an intellectual and friendly relationship with Enrico Hillyer Giglioli, the Head of the Museum of Natural History in Florence (Italy). They exchanged data and objects, coming particularly from Indonesia and Japan, at a time when so few European specialists paid attention to the material culture of ancient Asian people. This work relies on unpublished archives to disclose Hubert’s interest in Asian archaeological cultures, at a time when he participated in the Congress of Orientalists at Hanoi, and prepared the special room devoted to comparative archaeology at the Museum of National Archaeology.

Archaeology of Asia ed. by Miriam T. Stark (review)

Reviewed by: Archaeology of Asia ed. by Miriam T. Stark Joshua Wright Archaeology of Asia. Miriam T. Stark, ed. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. 364 pp. is there an archaeology of asia? The field of Asian archaeology has been transformed technologically, methodologically, and interpretationally over the past two decades. These developments cry out for a new synthesis in the tradition of Chang (1986) and Barnes (1993)—a single book that will introduce a student already conversant in the basics of archaeology to the archaeology of Asia. The series in which this book, The Archaeology of Asia, is published, Blackwell’s Studies in Global Archaeology, aims to present volumes that are fundamentally books for teaching. The target audience is advanced undergraduate students who are prepared to tackle theoretically sophisticated concepts in archaeology. The Archaeology of Asia is not a new synthesis of Asian archaeology, but it is nevertheless a good complement to any already developed course on the archaeology of Asia. The volume contains strong chapters on the emergence of the state in East and Inner Asia and on the position of archaeology in modern society. However, as a teaching tool it lacks unifying themes. Any teacher who wishes to use the book as the basis for a class will have to construct a thematic synthesis to tie the volume’s articles together. On the one hand, this is a great drawback for the busy lecturer who must build a course on the archaeology of Asia and is looking for an “out of the box” course textbook. On the other hand, the lack of thematic structure offers many options for building one’s own course using chronology, topical issues, regional studies, or research methods as a basis. This book is most interesting for the snapshot it offers of the state of archaeology in Asia in 2006. Stark’s editorial introduction highlights the main theme of the volume, which is diversity in every possible aspect of archaeological data and approaches. As a whole, the chapters collected in The Archaeology of Asia exemplify the tension between any local archaeology (i.e., one that is Asia-oriented or has an even more specific regional focus) and the use of global models, methods, and theories. A synthesis emerges in the chapters by Underhill and Habu and Shelach and Pines, for example, but the most successful chapters are those taking a mainly global view, such as those by Bellwood and Liu and Chen. This raises the question, can there be an archaeology of Asia at all? The volume itself is divided into four sections: the modern context of archaeology in Asia; the formative periods of Asian societies; the emergence of complex political systems; and a section entitled “Crossing Boundaries” that addresses the archaeology of regions beyond East and Southeast Asia. In the lead chapter, Glover discusses the history of archaeology in Asia through the lens of political context. Though he touches upon the possible dangers of the political uses of archaeology, the main thrust of his chapter is on the value of a national archaeology. Archaeology, Glover argues, acts as a unifying force in modernizing nations through the roots that can be found in rediscovered [End Page 157] ancient greatness. The following chapter by Nelson illustrates Glover’s thesis. This detailed study of Korean archaeology in its political context focuses on the elaborately shifting positions of Korea and Koreans as the nations of the Korean Peninsula emerged into the modern world. Japan is perhaps the only nation on earth where a self-critical analysis of the intertwined relationship between archaeology, ethnicity, and national identity is possible. Such self-reflexivity has been possible because of the extensive and sophisticated archaeological fieldwork that has taken place there along with a public awareness of the archaeological past and perceived strong cultural connections between the modern population and the past. Though other nations covered in this volume may have one or two of these factors, Japan is the only country with all three. Mizoguchi’s sophisticated and concise chapter discusses the centrality of modern Japanese archaeology to Japan’s national identity. He covers two fascinating topics: the appeal of “Jomon-ness” in modern Japan and the foundations of Japanese society in...

Response to ‘The National Planning Policy Framework and Archaeology: A Discussion’

The CPRE believes good land-use planning is the unsung hero of environmental protection and, as defined by the National Policy Planning Framework (NPPF), the environment includes the natural, built and historic environment, of which archaeology is a part. The historic environment cons of the NPPF have been set out in the article and, in terms of archaeology in particular, the move away from public and research benefits is a step back. But there are also positives that can be taken from the changes.

The National Planning Policy Framework and Archaeology: A Response by RESCUE - The British Archaeological Trust

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) delivers a concise set of policies which the development industry can view (with some satisfaction given its brevity) as being the basic standard principles by which their work must be conducted. The core of sensible planning is here – care for the economy, consideration of the environment, quality of design and, crucially for our profession, conservation and enhancement of the Historic Environment. The authors (Joe Flatman and Dominic Perring) correctly highlight the very inclusion of heritage as a welcome advancement on previous regimes.

The National Planning Policy Framework and Archaeology: Response to the Respondents

The respondents to our paper highlight a lot of similarity of thought and worry about the NPPF. The two biggest emotions seem to be ‘it could have been worse’ and ‘we must wait and see how it pans out’. That isn’t the most inspiring of positions for a community to be in, but chimes with the general emotions surrounding life in Britain in mid 2012, post-Olympics community fervour notwithstanding.

The National Planning Policy Framework and Archaeology: A Discussion

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) continues to divide opinion. This is especially the case in relation to heritage and the historic environment. On the one hand, the historic environment is given its own section in the document, and there is strong rhetoric around the importance of conserving unique heritage assets. On the other, aspects of the NPPF are a source of great concern, not least the so-called ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’. The end of the transition year, in which local authorities are supposedly updating their local plans, will therefore be a crucial moment for determining the longer-term impact of the NPPF.

The National Planning Policy Framework and Archaeology

This helpful addition to the literature and thinking around planning and archaeology comes at an exciting time, as the Localism Act, streamlining of non-planning consents, economic recession and political change all converge. It is striking, in the review of archaeology and planning policy over some thirty years, what a revolution we have experienced in that time. When PPGs 16 and 15 were introduced in 1990s, they professed not to place any new responsibilities on local authorities, but in practice their implementation required a new zealousness, a significant new commitment and in many cases new skillsets among local authorities. Despite the challenges for even-handed implementation, it is to the enormous credit of authorities around the country that the PPG policies were implemented to the extent they were.

The National Planning Policy Framework and Archaeology: A Response – How did the Profession come to this?

The transition of planning policy for archaeology and the historic environment in England from Planning Policy Guidance note 16 (PPG 16) to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) via Planning Policy Statement 5 (PPS5) is an important one. It mirrors in some ways the development of the commercial branch of archaeology, and of its professional institute, the Institute for Archaeologists (IfA). In this response I do not seek to reprise or challenge the key policy changes, magisterially summarised by Flatman and Perring, but to explore what they mean and have meant for the sector, how the discipline reacted (or should have reacted), and what it all means for professionalism.

The National Planning Policy Framework and Archaeology: A Discussion

For twenty years, ‘rescue’ archaeology and cultural resource management in England lived within the certain world of Planning Policy Guidance Note 16: Archaeology and Planning (the PPG) (DoE 1990). The PPG gave our profession clear locus and status within the business of development and planning. Those who wished to disturb archaeological remains in order to build were effectively obliged to pay for the excavation and publication of those remains they could not preserve in situ – provided that local planners were prepared to take on board the conservation agenda described for them in the PPG. The PPG provided a new language of investigative procedure, built around deskbased assessments, field evaluations, written schemes of investigation, and programmes of mitigation (usually a combination of excavation and avoidance). Whilst the PPG relied on a series of contestable assumptions it gave archaeologists unprecedented access to sites and funds. A full obituary of the PPG would be long on its flaws, but those in professional practice benefitted from expanded horizons of archaeological employment and research (see Aitchison 2010, 2012). The policies set out within the PPG secured almost all of the advances made during the ‘rescue’ era of British archaeology in the 1970s and 80s whilst reducing our reliance on state funding.