Introduction to new approaches to combining the archaeological and historical records

Abstract

INTRODUCTIONThe papers in this special issue are about the method, theory, and practice of scientific, historically oriented archaeology. They address this theme by developing and operationalizing systematic analyses of multiple lines of evidence about the past; these include the archaeological record and various combinations of historical, linguistic, and ethnographic information. The use of nonmaterial evidence in archaeology, of course, is nothing new; throughout the discipline's history, most researchers have combined these sources. What distinguishes the papers in this collection [and those in several other recent volumes, especially Knapp (1992b)] from their predecessors is a shift that is both methodological and strategic. Below, I sketch out the familiar history of the field in order to situate our efforts within that larger context.The methods of the so-called "culture history" paradigm that dominated archaeology in the pre-Binford years were guided by marked preference for the spectacular evidence of elites (tombs, temples, and the chronicles of kings). Practitioners culled specific passages from the documentary record to complement their archaeological focus on elite remains. In part, this reflected the predilections of wealthy first-world researchers trained in an esoteric field with little practical relevance. It also carried subtler implications. As Feinman illustrates in his conclusions to this volume (see also Patterson, 1986;Trigger, 1989), culture history characteristically follows an agenda set by political (or corporate) interests. The manipulation of history for political ends is as old as complex society itself, 1Department of Anthropology,

From “1-Eye” to Bruce Byland: Literate Societies and Integrative Approaches in Oaxaca

“…30 Notes 1. In addition to numerous articles and unpublished dissertations, some of the specialized edited volumes and monographs include Andrén 1998;Bartlett 1997;Beaudry 1993;Boyd et al 2000;Brambila Paz and Monjarás-Ruiz 1996;Dymond 1974;Funari et al 1999;Kepecs and Kolb 1997;Knapp 1992;Levy 2010;Little 1992;Martinón-Torres and Rehren 2008;Moreland 2001;Orser and Fagan 1995;Rogers and Wilson 1993;Sauer 2004;B. Schmidt 2007;P.…”

On the Use of Archaeology and History in Island Southeast Asia

“…These in uences have been analyzed extensively in other publications, some with book length treatments, and I will not attempt to review them all here (Andren 1998;Beaudry, Cook, and Mrozowski 1991;Bintliff 1991;Boyd, Erwin, and Hendrickson 2000;Faubion 1993;Kepecs 1997;Kirch and Sahlins 1992;Leone and Potter 1988;Lightfoot 1995;Schuyler 1978;Schuyler 1988;Trigger 1989;Young 1988). Another topic of concern that I will not attempt to review closely is the role of oral history, tradition and myth in combination with archaeology (Kus 1997;McBride and Rudden 2000).…”

Historical Archaeology of Indigenous Culture Change in Mesoamerica

“…Importantly, archaeologists view historical archaeology as historical anthropology where history, archaeology, and anthropology meet to effectively study past societies and culture change (Deagan 1998;Gasco et al 1997;Hall and Silliman 2006;Kepecs 1997a;Kepecs and Alexander 2005;Orser 1996). Mesoamerica is an ideal venue for studying ethnicity, impacts of disease, agency in culture contact, and ethnogenesis, where different perspectives can be gained.…”