Much of Archaeological Inference Is Necessarily Based on Uniformitarian Assumptions

ANTH 235,

ETHNOARCHAEOLOGY &

EXPERIMENTAL ARCHAEOLOGY

Much of archaeological inference is necessarily based on uniformitarian assumptions.

“There is no present or future; only the past endlessly repeating itself” – Eugene O’Neill, A Moon for the Misbegotten (1952)

or, stated another way…

“The past is never dead. It’s not even past.” – William Faulkner, Requiem for a Nun (1951)

ethnoarchaeology: “the study of contemporary peoples to understand the behavioral relationships that underlie the production of material culture to aid in unraveling the archaeological record.”

experimental archaeology: “the study of past behavioral processes through experimental reconstruction under controlled scientific conditions.”

Sir John Lubbock (1834-1913)

Prehistoric Times, as Illustrated by Ancient Remains and the Manners and Customs of Modern Savages (1865)

William Johnson Sollas (1849-1936)

Ancient Hunters and their Modern Representatives (1911),

coined the phrase “ethnographic analogy”

Some archaeologists avoid analogy all together, saying

1. every culture is a unique entity

2. any inferences made about one culture based on observations of another culture are bound to be distortions of the truth

3. modern cultures have had longer to evolve and develop adaptations not available in the past

ETHNOARCHAEOLOGY:

Significance of John Yellen’s work among the !Kung Bushmen foragers of the Kalahari Desert in Botswana:

· Provided little support for the common assumption that artifacts found in similar archaeological contexts must have been involved in similar activities.

· Suggested debris from subsistence activities may be mixed with debris from manufacturing activities – no absolute spatial separation.

· Most important: these specific observations can be generalized to help interpretation of a wide variety of archaeological contexts.

J. Peter White’s work among the Duna-speakers in the highlands of New Guinea (below). White wanted to identify the social variables of flint knapping. White explored the mental template concept.

This is a chair…

No, this is a chair…!

No, actually, THIS is a bloody chair…!

Ethnoarchaeology allows the formulation of “bridging arguments” to link the ethnographic present with the archaeological past.

Many controversial issues remain to be resolved, most particularly:

· How far back in time can we apply these methods?

· Is it relevant at all to study the behavior of modern non-industrial foraging peoples as a guide to understanding Paleolithic life-ways?

EXPERIMENTAL ARCHAEOLOGY:

Kinds of experiments attempted by archaeologists include a wide range of activities, including:

· raising replica stone heads (moai) from Rapa Nui

· constructing a replica Roman catapult (below, left)

· butchering animals with stone tools & cooking in skin vessels (below, right)

No matter what the experiment, however, a number of over-arching considerations apply:

· materials used should be those locally available to the people who produced the original item

· methods used should not include any beyond the technological competence of the ancient society (e.g., don’t use a bulldozer to construct an experimental prehistoric canal system!)

· experiments should be repetitive, if possible, each building on results of previous tests

· results of experiments should lead to a series of observations that may, in turn, suggest certain conclusions. Proof absolute should not be assumed or claimed!

· corroborative evidence should always be sought – more experiments, ethnoarchaeology, excavation.

CONCLUSIONS

1. Ethnoarchaeology and experimental archaeology are two aspects of the same activity: the archaeologist’s endeavor to glean information about the past from the present.

2. Both proceed according to strict scientific conventions and have moved very far away from their rather naïve, even quaint, and simplistic origins several generations ago to become part of the mainstream of methods and theories that archaeologists regularly employ in their attempt to reconstruct past human behavior.