Aktuella teoretiska och metodologiska problem inom arkeologin

AE2030 H24 Aktuella teoretiska och metodologiska problem inom arkeologin I

Avancerad nivå 15hp

LITTERATURLISTA

Inledning: arkeologisk teori i metod och arkeologisk metod i teori (352 s.)

Bailey, G. (2007). Time perspectives, palimpsests and the archaeology of time. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 26(2), 198–223. (26 s.)

González-Ruibal, A. (2006). The past is tomorrow. Towards an archaeology of the vanishing present. Norwegian Archaeological Review 39(2), 110–125. (25 s.)

Griffiths, S. (2017). We’re all cultural historians now: Revolutions in understanding archaeological theory and scientific dating. Radiocarbon 59(5), 1347–1357. (10 s.)

Karlsson, H. 2005. Why is there material culture rather than nothing? Heideggerian thoughts and archaeology. In: P. P. A. Funari, A. Zarankin and E. Stovel, eds. Global archaeological theory: Contextual voices and contemporary thoughts. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 29‒42. (13 s.)

Kassel, K. (2008). Den postprocessuella teorireceptionen inom svensk arkeologi. Lychnos 2008, 227‒247. (20 s.)/

Kristiansen, K. (2014). Towards a new paradigm? The third science revolution and its possible consequences in archaeology. And comments by E. S. Chilton, A. González-Ruibal, I. Huvila, S. Larsson, E. Niklasson. Current Swedish Archaeology 22(1), 1–71. (70 s.)

Hegmon, M. (2003). Setting theoretical egos aside: Issues and theory in North American archaeology. American Antiquity 68(2), 213‒243. (30 s.)

Lucas, G. and Olsen, B. (2022). The case study in archaeological theory. American Antiquity 87(2), 352‒367. (15 s.)

Nativ, A. (2018). On the object of archaeology. And comments by G. Lucas, M. Edgeworth, C. Witmore, O. Harris. Archaeological Dialogues 25(1), 1‒47. (46 s.)

Martinón-Torres, M. and Killick, D. (2013). Archaeological theories and archaeological sciences. In: A. Gardner, M. Lake and U. Sommer, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Archaeological Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (22 s.)

Ogundiran, A. (2013). The end of Prehistory? An Africanist comment. The American Historical Review 118(3), 788–801. (13 s.)

Sørensen, T. F. (2017). The two cultures and a world apart: Archaeology and science at a new crossroads. And comments by H. J. Fossheim, K. Kristiansen, K. Lidén, M. Vander Linden. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 50(2), 101–134. (33 s.)

Thomas, J. (2015). The future of archaeological theory. Antiquity 89(348), 1287–1296. (10 s.)

Wylie, A. (1992). On ‘heavily decomposing red herrings:’ Scientific method in archaeology and the ladening of evidence with theory. In: L. Embree, ed. Metaarchaeology. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 269–288. (19 s.)

Samhälle, materialitet & komplexitet (134 s.)

Carballo, D. M., Roscoe, P. and Feinman, G. M. (2014). Cooperation and collective action in the cultural evolution of complex societies. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 21, 98–133. (36 s.)

Crumley, C. L. (1995). Heterarchy and the analysis of complex societies. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 6, 1–5. (6 s.)

DeMarrais, E. and Earle, T. (2017). Collective action theory and the dynamics of complex societies. Annual Review of Anthropology 46,183-201. (19 s.)

Fletcher, R. (1995). Chapter 1. The limits of settlement growth: A theoretical outline. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3–17. (14 s.)

Kohler, T. A. (2012). Complex systems and archaeology. In: I. Hodder, ed. Archaeological theory today, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity, 93–123. (31 s.)

Lobo, J., Bettencourt, L. M. A., Ortman, S. G. and Smith, M. E. (2020). Settlement scaling theory: Bridging the study of ancient and contemporary urban systems. Urban Studies 57(4),731‒747. (13 s.)

Smith, M. E. (2020). Definitions and comparisons in urban archaeology. Journal of Urban Archaeology 1, 15‒30. (15 s.)

*Entangling***, sammankoppling och marginalisering (121 s.)**

Fahlander, F. (2007). Third space encounters: Hybridity, mimicry, interstitial practice. In: P. Cornell and F. Fahlander, eds. Encounters/Materialities/Confrontations: Archaeologies of space and interaction. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars, 15‒41. (26 s.)

Knappett, C. (2017). Globalization, connectivities and networks: an archaeological perspective. In: T. Hodos, ed. The Routledge Handbook of Archaeology and Globalization. London: Routledge, 29‒41. (12 s.)

Hodder, I. (2014). The entanglements of humans and things: A long-term view. New Literary History 45(1), 19‒36. (17 s.)

González-Ruibal, A. (2021). Subaltern assemblages. The archaeology of marginal places and identities. World Archaeology 53(3), 369–383. (14 s.)

Lawrence, S. and Sheperd, N. (2005). Historical archaeology and colonialism. In: D. Hicks and M.C. Beaudry, eds. The Cambridge Companion of Historical Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 69‒86. (18 s.)

Nordin, J. M., Fernstål, L. and Hyltén-Cavallius, C. (2021). Living on the margin: an archaeology of a Swedish Roma camp. World Archaeology 53(3), 517–530. (13 s.)

Tainter, J.A. (2006) Archaeology of overshoot and collapse. Annual Review of Anthropology 35, 59–74. (16 s.)

Spangen, M., Salmi, A. K. and Äikäs, T. (2015) Sámi archaeology and postcolonial theory: An introduction. Arctic Anthropology 52(2), 1‒5. (5 s.).

Etik & det förflutnas politik (128 s.)

González-Ruibal, A. (2018). Ethics of archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 47(1), 345–360. (15 s.)

Gustafsson, A. and Karlsson, H. (2011). A spectre is haunting Swedish archaeology – the spectre of politics: Archaeology, cultural heritage and the present political situation in Sweden. Current Swedish Archaeology 19(1), 11–36. (25 s.)

Londoño, W. (2021). Indigenous archaeology, community archaeology, and decolonial archaeology: What are we talking about? A look at the current archaeological theory in South America with examples. Archaeologies 17, 386–406. (20 s.)

McGill, D. (2014). Ethics in archaeology. In: C. Smith, ed. Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. New York: Springer, 2458‒2468. (10 s.)

Meskell, L. (2012). The social life of heritage. In: I. Hodder, ed. Archaeological theory today, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity. (11 s.)

Pikirayi, I. (2016). Archaeology, local knowledge and tradition. In: P. R. Schmidt and I. Pikirayi, eds. Community archaeology and heritage in Africa. London: Routledge, 112‒ 135. (24s).

Van Dyke, R. M. (2021). Ethics, not objects. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 31, 487–493. (6 s.)

Watkins, J. (2022). Indigenous archaeology revisited: Is it still needed or necessary? In: C. Smith et al., eds. The Oxford Handbook of Global Indigenous Archaeologies, Online ed. (17 s.)

*Applied archaeology*** (165 s.)**

Crumley, C. L. (2021). Historical ecology: A robust bridge between archaeology and ecology. Sustainability 13(15), 8210. (12 s.)

Isendahl, C. and Stump, D. (2019). Conclusion: Anthropocentric historical ecology, applied archaeology, and the future of a usable past. In: C. Isendahl and D. Stump, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Historical Ecology and Applied Archaeology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 581‒598 (17 s.)

Lane, P. J. (2019). Just how long does “long-term” need to be? Matters of temporal scale as impediments to interdisciplinary understanding in historical ecology. In: C. Isendahl and D. Stump, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Historical Ecology and Applied Archaeology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 49‒71. (13 s.)

M'Mbogori, F. N., Abduba, K., Gufu, A., Kinyua, M. G., Tiki, W. and Lane, P. (2022). Using community archaeology to protect indigenous wells and pastoral biocultural heritage in Northern Kenya. In C. Smith et al., eds. The Oxford Handbook of Global Indigenous Archaeologies, Online ed. (23 s.)

Middleton, G. D. (2017). The show must go on: collapse, resilience, and transformation in 21st-century archaeology. Reviews in Anthropology 46(2–3), 78–105. (28 s.)

Minnis, P. E. (2019). Thinking like an archaeologist and thinking like an engineer: A utilitarian-perspective archaeology. In C. Isendahl and D. Stump, eds The Oxford Handbook of Historical Ecology and Applied Archaeology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 21‒30. (9 s.)

Redman, C. L. (2005). Resilience theory in archaeology. American Anthropologist 107(1), 70–77. (7 s.)

Smith, M. E. (2021). Why archaeology’s relevance to global challenges has not been recognized. Antiquity 95(382), 1061–1087. (26 s.)

Stump, D. (2013). On applied archaeology, indigenous knowledge, and the usable past. Current anthropology 54(3), 268–298. (30 s.)

Föreslagna referensböcker

Butzer, K.W. (1982) Archaeology as human ecology: Method and theory for a contextual approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (364 s.)

Gonzalez-Ruibal, A. (2019.) An archaeology of the contemporary era. London: Routledge. (250 s.)

Gibbon, G. E. (2014) Critically reading the theory and methods of archaeology: An introductory guide. Lanham, Maryland: AltaMira Press. (245 s.)

Johnson, M. (2020). Archaeological theory: An introduction. 3rd ed. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell. (400 s.)

Harris, O. J. T. and Cipolla, C., eds. (2017). Archaeological theory in the new millennium: Introducing current perspectives. London: Routledge. (238 s.).

Hodder, I., ed. (2012) Archaeological theory today. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Polity. (320 s.)

Trigger, B. G. (2006) A history of archaeological thought. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (710 s.)