Suchergebnisse

Accepting Globalisation means accepting diffusion, but globalisation has much to offer archaeologists, i.a. a monopoly on the sources of information for the early history and nature of globalisation. Beyond that, the elementary units of globalisation are not the states and boundaries we cannot find, but rather the cultures and civilisations we do and thus, there is less of a methodological confrontation with theory. Furthermore, globalisation offers a different approach to questions of economics which vex archaeological research. Approaching history from this vantage point allows a clearer means of structuring our understanding of history by combining cognitive, political, economic, social and cultural elements relating to identity and exchange to organise spatial and temporal groupings. ; Globalisierung anzunehmen bedeutet Diffusion anzuerkennen, aber Globalisierung bietet dem Archäologen vieles, u.a. ein Monopol für die Erfassung der frühen Geschichte und Natur der Globalisierung. Wichtig ist, dass die Elementareinheiten der Globalisierung nicht die Staaten und Grenzen sind, die wir nicht finden, sondern die Kulturen und Zivilisationen die wir gut erkennen können; daraus ergibt sich weniger Streit mit sozialer Theoriebildung. Weiterhin eröffnet die Globalisierung eine Möglichkeit der Wirtschaft näher zu kommen als es bisher der Fall war. Geschichte auf diese Weise aufzufassen bedeutet die Vereinheitlichung von kognitiven, politischen, wirtschaftlichen, sozialen und kulturellen Elementen, die mit Identität und Austausch verbunden sind, um letztere räumlich und zeitlich einzugrenzen.

This group of 13 archaeologists came mostly from universities and research institutes in Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, and Niger, with two from American universities. They met under the auspices of the Institute of African Studies, Fourah Bay College—the first time that Sierra Leone has played host to an archaeological symposium. Each participant had been actively engaged on fieldwork in Africa and presented the results of his research.

Archaeologists in Print is a history of popular publishing in archaeology in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, a pivotal period of expansion and development in both archaeology and publishing. It examines how British archaeologists produced books and popular periodical articles for a non-scholarly audience, and explores the rise in archaeologists' public visibility. Notably, it analyses women's experiences in archaeology alongside better known male contemporaries as shown in their books and archives. In the background of this narrative is the history of Britain's imperial expansion and contraction, and the evolution of modern tourism in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. Archaeologists exploited these factors to gain public and financial support and interest, and build and maintain a reading public for their work, supported by the seasonal nature of excavation and tourism. Reinforcing these publishing activities through personal appearances in the lecture hall, exhibition space and site tour, and in new media – film, radio and television – archaeologists shaped public understanding of archaeology. It was spadework, scripted.

Archaelogy is sometimes perceive more as a searching for treasures. It is way easier to detach objects that can be related to elites from al found relics. But separaring articles which had their connection with poor and the lowest society group is much harder than this Findings of clothes made of worse fabrics, pieced out and repaired, could be a potential source for the pleb`s material culture. However, we also know examples of clothes meant for the elite, made of many smaller pieces of fabric sewed together for the economy. There are some findings of decorated shose, spoiledm then patched. Many objects use for the next time have been found during excavations in elite`s houses or converted from elite`s weapon. Researches of towns or on the backgrounds. The characted of those archaeological material let us being sure which ones of those buildings were inhabited and, mostly, by the poors. From the other hand, a confrontation of sociotopographic analysis with precise archaeological studies do not bring an unequivocal proof for efficacy of this method. Even if many written sources describe some areas as poor, there were a lot of expensive objects found there. It all shows difficulty or even impossibility of reliable archaological searchings for relics of medieval poverty.