A Bicycle Made for Two? The Integration of Scientific Techniques into Archaeological Interpretation

Bibliographic Data

ID2296602
AuthorsA M Pollard (0000-0003-3757-4668, Oxford Archaeology), Peter Bray (0000-0002-8689-082X, University of Oxford)
Year2007
Volume36
Issue1
Pages245-259
Publication date2007-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueAnnual Review of Anthropology (BOOK_SERIES)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0084-6570 • E-ISSN: 1545-4290
PublisherAnnual Reviews (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1146/annurev.anthro.36.081406.094354
OpenAlexW2169642052
LanguageEN
Citations received27
References cited52

Much of the literature on the integration of science and archaeology has tended to focus on mistakes, tensions, and problems. Many scholars have also been obsessed with definitions and delineating the boundaries between varieties of archaeologist. In this article we aim to move away from this by discussing the pragmatic ways that progress has been achieved in applying scientific solutions to interpreting the past. Progress has not been dependent on overcoming supposed fundamental differences between the humanities and sciences; instead it has been based around cooperation on the vast tracts of common ground. This article highlights key arenas that encourage this process of information flow and discussion: interdisciplinary field work, new scientific techniques, new archaeological questions, and education. What is increasingly important in archaeology is how we can encourage researchers to contribute to group solutions of problems and cross outdated disciplinary boundaries

Archaeology · Discipline · Engineering ethics · Epistemology · Field (mathematics · Focus (optics · Interpretation (philosophy · Linguistics · Process (computing · Social science · Sociology · Work (physics · Archaeological Research and Protection · Archaeology and ancient environmental studies · Computer Science · Engineering · History · Image Processing and 3D Reconstruction · Philosophy