European Regional Studies: A Coming of Age?

Abstract

This article reviews current developments in European regional studies. A brief history of settlement archaeology as practiced in Europe is followed by a discussion of new approaches to regional analysis and surface survey. I argue that recent, steady investments in the technology, methods, and theory of regional archaeological analysis and surface survey have stimulated advances in the study of settlement patterns and settlement pattern change through time in many parts of Europe. When innovative technologies (e.g., remote sensing, GPS, GIS), methods (e.g., geoarchaeology, "siteless" survey), and new theoretical frameworks (both processual and postprocessual) have been combined, breakthroughs in our understanding of European settlement have resulted. In the last half of the article, I describe some of these breakthroughs in a broad discussion of European settlement history, beginning with the earliest prehistory of Europe through the Middle Ages. Shifts in perspective are particularly apparent for phases of transition: from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic, Paleolithic to Mesolithic to Neolithic, and with the rise and expansion of states.

Life among the tides : recent archaeology on the Georgia Bight : proceedings of the Sixth Caldwell Conference, St. Catherines Island, Georgia, May 20-22, 2011.

“…This has led some archaeologists to call for a true "siteless" archaeology in which the distribution of objects is analyzed directly rather than from the analytical units derived from the empirical record (Ebert, 1992;Ebert et al, 1996;Galaty, 2005). While the goals of "siteless" archaeology are appreciated, it is impossible to pursue such a program within the coastal Southeast because of the difficulty in encountering archaeological materials without excavation.…”

The Historiography of Landscape Research on Crete

“…Intensive surveys have naturally resulted in an amazing quantity of new data, which have encouraged the rise of demographic archaeology Sbonias 1999, 2000;Hassan 2004) as well as synthetic works regarding long term patterns or period specific studies over large areas, based on the integration of results from different surveys (Alcock 1993(Alcock , 1994Blanton 2000;Wilkinson 2000;Halstead and Frederick 2000;Halstead 1994;Jameson 1994;Jameson et al 1994;Blanton et al 1982;Adams 1981;Bintliff 1997;Attema and van Leusen 2004;Galaty 2005;Mee 1999;Driessen 2001etc). …”

Fortifications and Enclosures in European Prehistory: A Cross-Cultural Perspective

“…Most recent syntheses have been regional in scope and have concentrated on detailed historical trajectories rather than considering variability at the continental scale. These detailed analyses were prompted by trends in the discipline toward regional analyses (see Galaty 2005) and by the development and widespread application of aerial photography, radiocarbon dating, and satellite and site-based remote-sensing technologies. Another contributing factor has been the expansion of laws and, more importantly, money for managing and preserving cultural heritage within Europe.…”

“…Probably most important in this regard is the general trend in European prehistory toward the ''region'' as the primary unit of analysis. Galaty (2005) suggests European regional studies are fast becoming a standard analytical framework in European archaeology. He traces this trend toward regional analyses to the 1950s and 1960s when topographic survey projects first were conducted in Europe.…”

“…This trend away from more generalizing models that seek to explain archaeological phenomena at larger temporal and spatial scales has followed a general trend in archaeological research that began with a concern for regional analysis in the New Archaeology (e.g., Binford 1964;Clarke 1972) and gave way gradually to landscape studies and settlement pattern approaches (Galaty 2005). Similarly, the theoretical frameworks that emphasized labor and political organization (e.g., Renfrew 1974) have yielded to those that emphasize the symbolic role of monuments and their implications for understanding things like cultural identity and group memory (e.g., Edmonds 1999).…”