The Language of Archaeology II
or: How I survived the paradigm shift
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v4i1.6Keywords:
paradigm shift, theory in archaeology, ; culture-historical, processual and post-processual approaches, the position of the researcherAbstract
The paper is an auto-reflexive critical reconsideration of the author’s own previous writings on theory in archaeology. The imperfections of the early papers are scrutinized in connection to the prevailing attitude in the local disciplinary community at the time. Archaeology in Serbia has been withdrawn from the main theoretical discussions, and the individual attempts were aimed at compensating for this setback, introducing the essence of the current debates. Since the two major paradigms of the discipline – processual and post-processual, formulated in their original setting within the timespan of almost three decades, were presented simultaneously, they were merged in an unconsistent manner.
Downloads
References
Babić, S. 1992. Jezik arheologije (The Language of Archaeology), Glasnik Srpskog arheološkog društva 8, 114 – 118.
Babić, S. 1993. Arheologija i antropologija (Archaeology and Anthropology), Glasnik Srpskog arheološkog društva 9, 143 – 147.
Babić, S. 2002. Still innocent after all these years? Sketches for a social history of archaeology in Serbia. Archäologien Europas: Geschihte, Methoden und Theorien/Archaeologies of Europe: History, Methods and Theories, Tübinger Archäologische Taschenbücher 3, 309 – 322.
Babić, S. 2004. Poglavarstvo i polis: Starije gvozdeno doba Centralnog Balkana i grčki svet, Beograd: Balkanološki institut SANU.
Babić, S. 2006. Archaeology in Serbia – A Way Forward? Homage to Milutin Garašanin, N. Tasić, C. Grozdanov (eds.), Belgrade: Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, 655 – 659.
Babić, S. 2008. Grci i drugi – Antička percepcija i percepcija antike, Beograd: Klio
Biehl, P, A. Gramsch & A. Marciniak (eds). 2002. Archäologien Europas: Geschihte, Methoden und Theorien/Archaeologies of Europe: History, Methods and Theories, Tübinger Archäologische Taschenbücher 3.
Binford, L. R. 1962. Archaeology as Anthropology, American Antiquity 28, 217 – 225.
Binford, L. R. 1983. In Pursuit of the Past. Decoding the Archaeological Record, London, New York: Thames & Hudson.
Bourdieu, P. 1988. Homo Academicus, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Clarke, D. L. 1968. Analytical Archaeology, London: Methuen.
Cčarke, D. L. 1973. Archaeology: the loss of innocence, Antiquity vol. 47, 1973, 6 – 15.
Džonson, M. 2008. Uvod u arheološku teoriju, Beograd: Klio.
Golden M. & P. Toohey (eds). 1997. Inventing Ancient Culture – Historicism, periodization, and the ancient world, London, New York: Routledge.
Hamilakis, Y. 2007. The Nation and its Ruins. Antiquity, Archaeology, and National Imagination in Greece, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hodder, I. 1986. Reading the past. Current approaches to interpretation in archaeology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hodder, I. 1999. The Archaeological Process. An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell
Hodder, I. (ed.). 1991. Archaeological theory in Europe – the last three decades, London, New York: Routledge.
Humphreys, S.C. 2002. Classics and Colonialism: Towards an Erotics of the Discipline, Disciplining Classics, G. W. Most (ed.), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 207 – 251.
Kun, T. 1974. Struktura naučnih revolucija, Beograd: Nolit.
McGuire, R. 1992. A Marxist Archaeology, Orlando: Academic Press.
Morley, N. 2009. Antiquity and Modernity, Oxford: Wiley-Blacwell.
Morris, I. 1994. Archaeologies of Greece, Classical Greece – Ancient Histories and Modern Archaeologies, I. Morris (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 8 – 47
Morris, I. 2000. Archaeology as Cultural History, Oxford: Blackwell.
Morris, I. (ed.). 1994. Classical Greece – Ancient Histories and Modern Archaeologies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nortwick, T. van 1997. Who do I think I am? Compromising Traditions – The Personal Voice in Classical Scholarship, J. P. Hallet & T. van Nortwick (eds), London, New York: Routledge, 16 – 24.
Nortwick, T. van 1997b. Conclusion. What is classical scholarship for, Compromising Traditions – The Personal Voice in Classical Scholarship, J. P. Hallet & T. van Nortwick (eds), London, New York: Routledge, 182 – 190.
Olsen, B. 2002. Od predmeta do teksta. Teorijske perspektive arheoloških istraživanja, Beograd: Geopoetika.
Palavestra, A. 2009. Structuralism en archeologie, Etnoantropološki problemi God. 4. Br. 2. (in press)
Preucel, R. & I. Hodder (eds). 1996. Contemporary Archaeology in Theory, Oxford: Blackwell
Radhakrishnan, R. 2003. Theory in an Uneven World, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
Settis, S. 2006. The Future of the Classical, Cambridge: Polity Press. Shanks, M.1996 – Classical Archaeology of Greece - Experiences of the Discipline, London, New York: Routledge Shanks, M. & C. Tilley. 1987. Re-constructing Archaeology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Snodgrass, A. M. 2002. A Paradigm Shift in Classical Archaeology? Cambridge Archaeological Journal 12, 179 – 193.
Spasić, I. 2005. Prevoditi i pisati sociologiju, Mostovi 131-132, 168 – 178.
Thomas, J. 2004. Archaeology and Modernity, London, New York: Routledge
Tilley, C. 1989. Archaeology as socio-political action in the present, Critical traditions in contemporary archaeology, V. Pinsky, A.Wylie (eds), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 104 – 116.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
ERIH PLUS - European Reference Index for the Humanities
World Cat
AnthroSerbia
