David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Spontaneous Generations 6 (1):24-33 (2012)
Between 1968 and 1975, international and multidisciplinary rescue excavations were undertaken in Eastern Turkey before the construction of the Keban Dam. This article focuses on three specific visual techniques (the artifact typology, the trench shot, and the gridded map) found in the site reports of this salvage project, in order to analyze the way archaeology visually defines its object(s) of study. While scientific excavations make discoveries of the past visible, their representations in the discipline’s final publications conceal the human agents responsible for them. In other words, as tools of visualization foreground archaeological knowledge, the conditions of its production are concurrently sidelined. By relegating the messy process of “digging” to the background, archaeology’s techniques of visualization allow its practitioners to see the past, and all of its objects, from a distant present located “nowhere.”
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Ian Russell (ed.) (2006). Images, Representations and Heritage: Moving Beyond Modern Approaches to Archaeology. Springer.
Matthew Johnson (1999). Archaeological Theory: An Introduction. Blackwell Publishers.
Peter Kosso (2001). Knowing the Past: Philosophical Issues of History and Archaeology. Humanity Books.
Rodney Harrison (2010). After Modernity: Archaeological Approaches to the Contemporary Past. Oxford University Press.
Ben Jeffares (2003). The Scope and Limits of Biological Explanations in Archaeology. Dissertation, Victoria University of Wellington
J. A. Lloyd (1986). Why Should Historians Take Archaeology Seriously? In J. L. Bintliff & C. F. Gaffney (eds.), Archaeology at the Interface: Studies in Archaeology's Relationships with History, Geography, Biology, and Physical Science. B.A.R..
J. Chapman (1986). Human Sociobiology and Archaeology. In J. L. Bintliff & C. F. Gaffney (eds.), Archaeology at the Interface: Studies in Archaeology's Relationships with History, Geography, Biology, and Physical Science. B.A.R..
J. L. Bintliff & C. F. Gaffney (eds.) (1986). Archaeology at the Interface: Studies in Archaeology's Relationships with History, Geography, Biology, and Physical Science. B.A.R..
Norman Yoffee & Andrew Sherratt (eds.) (1993). Archaeological Theory: Who Sets the Agenda? Cambridge University Press.
Julian Thomas (ed.) (2000). Interpretive Archaeology: A Reader. Leicester University Press.
Valerie Pinsky & Alison Wylie (eds.) (1989). Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology: Essays in the Philosophy, History, and Socio-Politics of Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.
Gary McCulloch (1997). Privatising the Past? History and Education Policy in the 1990s. British Journal of Educational Studies 45 (1):69 - 82.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-10-04
Total downloads1 ( #446,747 of 1,103,008 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #297,567 of 1,103,008 )
How can I increase my downloads?