{"id":7651,"date":"2025-04-26T00:53:57","date_gmt":"2025-04-26T00:53:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/?page_id=7651"},"modified":"2025-05-23T00:59:35","modified_gmt":"2025-05-23T00:59:35","slug":"approaches-to-archaeology-general-2","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/approaches-to-archaeology-general-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Approaches to Archaeology (General 2)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Format: Paper presentations with discussion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Convenors<\/strong>: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stephen C. Jett, University of California, Davis, USA, scjett@hotmail.com <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tim Owen, GML Heritage & Flinders University, Australia, tim.owen@gml.com.au<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This session explores diverse perspectives that critically reframe archaeological narratives, cultural histories, and disciplinary assumptions. Together, these papers advocate for pluralistic approaches that incorporate local knowledge, question dominant assumptions, and foreground the deep temporal and cultural dimensions of archaeological interpretation in diverse parts of the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Papers:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Discussing the Possibilities of Identifying Cultural Variations in Central-South Patagonia<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nora Viviana Franco<\/em>, IMHICIHU-CONICET and University of Buenos Aires, FFyL,\u00a0<\/em>Argentina<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The initial researches in Patagonia were developed within a historical-cultural theoretical framework. Subsequently, and possibly as a reaction, subsequent research had a strong ecological emphasis. This led to the generation of important paleoenvironmental information, which was related to the strategies followed by human populations in the past. However, some of the technological changes detected, identified on a broad spatial and temporal scale, could not be related to the environmental variations detected or to the lithic and faunal resource structure. On the contrary, they appear to be the result of the actions of different human groups. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This paper presents and discusses examples of these cases, which developed from the Pleistocene-Holocene transition to the late Holocene, between the Deseado Massif (north of the Chico river basin) to the Magellan Strait. The usefulness of technological analysis for recognizing these changes in the archaeological record is highlighted. Their identification is possible given the knowledge of the lithics and faunal database, the identified environmental changes, and the large areas analyzed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is Diffusionism Racist and Colonialist? And Does it Matter?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stephen C.<\/em> <\/em>Jett<\/em> University of California, Davis, USA<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many allege that pre-Columbian transoceanic diffusionism is racist and colonialist and shouldn\u2019t be countenanced and that proposing outside influence on Indigenous Americans is implying intrinsic inferiority and robs them of credit for innovation; that positing innovatory centres and adoptive peripheries supported odious imperialism\u2019s vision of the superior \u2018White Man\u2019s burden.\u2019 However, Native Americans seldom sought credit for creating their cultures\u2019 contents, and racism is hardly implied in hypothesising eastern Asians influencing Northeast-Asian-derived Amerinds. Is it not racist to claim that only White Europeans could have \u2018discovered\u2019 and influenced First Americans or that the latter were incapable of learning from others or of participating in a global interaction network? Physical environment doesn\u2019t adequately explain the uneven distribution of cultural elaboration, implying that the anti-diffusionist is obliged to conclude that \u2018racial\u2019 differences are the explanation. Diffusionists feel that historical, not intrinsic, factors are paramount, that prerequisite to cultural elaboration is cultural exchange: that innovation is seldom spontaneous but diffusion may trigger it. In any case, whether explanations convey glory or its opposite to particular peoples or whether they support equality or inequality has absolutely no bearing on the truth of what happened in history. Search for the latter should be controlling in scholarship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An Investigative study of Sri Lankan literary sources that mention information about Himalayas.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

G.W.L.U.M Senarathna, Independent Scholar, Sri Lanka<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Himalayan region is a unique climate in the Indian subcontinent, due to the high-altitude mountains located in the vicinity. Sri Lanka is a country very close to India, with similar religious and cultural characteristics. The aim is to conduct a study on the Sri Lankan literary sources that mention information about the Himalayas. For this, ancient literary texts from Sri Lanka were examined as secondary data sources. The special point here is that information about the Himalayan region is mentioned in the Mahavamsa, which notes dangerous animals, as well as the fact that there are no other humans. There is a description of the Himalayas in the poems \u201cSamanola Vistharaya\u201d and \u201cSelalihini Sandesha\u201d, which contain environmental descriptions. In the book \u201cSavulasana\u201d, the well-being felt by a person living in the Himalayan forest is shown. Also, the \u201cJataka Book\u201d and \u201cThripitakya\u201d, the Sinhala version of the \u201cRamayana\u201d, have information about the Himalayas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Archaeology is a Historical Science\u2014The Unacknowledged Radical Difference from STEM Sciences <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alice B. <\/em>Kehoe<\/em> <\/em>Emeritus, Marquette University<\/em>, USA<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A small cadre of historians of science have clearly distinguished between common conceptions of \u2018science\u2019, the STEM physical sciences and mathematics, and the historical sciences: archaeology, palaeontology, and geology. Our sciences do NOT begin with hypotheses and test their validity by manipulating data in laboratories. We begin with empirical data literally \u2018given\u2019 to us in the ground (the syntagm). Then we search experience and ethnographies for situations in which similar phenomena appear. From these similarities we do IBE: interpret to best explanation. The philosopher who best describes our mode of science is C. S. Peirce, his process of \u2018abduction\u2019 from \u2018surprising\u2019 or \u2018anomalous\u2019 data (or ordinary site data). Peirce was a field working oceanographer. This presentation explains the historical sciences\u2019 procedure of data\u2014comparison with ethnographic data – conclusion on goodness of fit. Illustrations from data on pre-Columbian transoceanic and transcontinental contacts will illustrate historical science procedure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sydney Harbour\u2014A Deep Time Aboriginal Cultural Landscape<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tim Owen GML Heritage & Archaeology, Flinders University, Australia<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sydney Harbour is renowned today for its stunning vistas, dominated by iconic landmarks such as the Harbour Bridge and the World Heritage-listed Opera House. However, these relatively recent heritage items are situated within a Deep Time Aboriginal cultural landscape, one that has been inhabited by Sydney\u2019s First Nations peoples for over 35,000 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The historical records, dating back to invasion in 1788, contains few accounts of early British interactions with Aboriginal communities\u2014these overlook the rich cultural significance of this landscape. This paper offers a concise exploration of the Deep Time harbour landscape, adopting a cultural and social approach to unravel its transformation from a late Pleistocene grassy river valley into the deep, flooded harbour that we see today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By examining connections between known Aboriginal places and significant environmental changes over time, this study provides a fresh perspective on the harbour\u2019s physical and metaphysical creation. It aims to deepen our understanding of Sydney Harbour within its broader cultural and historical context.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Format: Paper presentations with discussion Convenors:  Stephen C. Jett, University of California, Davis, USA, scjett@hotmail.com Tim Owen, GML Heritage & Flinders University, Australia, tim.owen@gml.com.au This session explores diverse perspectives that critically reframe archaeological narratives, cultural histories, and disciplinary assumptions. Together, these papers advocate for pluralistic approaches that incorporate local knowledge, question dominant assumptions, and foreground the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1186,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"pmpro_default_level":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":{"0":"post-7651","1":"page","2":"type-page","3":"status-publish","5":"pmpro-has-access","6":"czr-hentry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7651","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1186"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7651"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7651\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8192,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7651\/revisions\/8192"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac10\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7651"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}