Archaeology and Development
Archaeology and Development
复制标题
考古与发展
DOI:
--
复制
发表时间:
1980
期刊:
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Danny Miller
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Danny Miller
AT A TIME WHEN ARCHAEOLOGY employs an epistemology derived from positivism (Watson, Le Blanc, and Redman 1971, Binford 1972, Schiffer 1976), it is not surprising that ideas about the nature of the subject have tended to be divorced from discussion of the social context within which it is practised and of how its results have meaning for its practitioners and for the general population. Archaeology is defined by its methodology and academic goals, which tend not to be seen as dependent upon the structure of society or the nature of academic discourse. Critics of positivism (e.g., Habermas 1972) suggest that an academic discipline cannot be defined except in relation to these issues. My concern here is with society as the context within which archaeology takes place and from which archaeology derives meaning. The social context includes the structure of employment, education, the mass media, and people's conceptions of the past and of the uses of the past in the present. It follows from this that where archaeology is employed in societies very different from those in which it originally developed, it may not be able merely to reproduce itself in its old image and expect all the familiar sets of relationships that define it to follow. It may become a different subject, and changes may become necessary in the ways in which it is discussed, utilised, and judged. Archaeology is the child of the developed countries, originating in the curiosity of the elite classes of preindustrial Europe;