COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT

0719274745

KENYATTA UNIVERSITY

INSTITUTE OF OPEN LEARNING

AHT101
PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY

LAZURUS KINYUA NGARI

DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
TABLE OF CONTENT

LESSON 1 ...........................................................................................................................4

DEVELOPMENT OF ARCHAELOGICAL THOUGHT .............................................4

LESSON II ........................................................................................................................13

ARCHAEOLOGICAL THEORIES...............................................................................13

LESSON III ......................................................................................................................22

THE CONCEPT OF CULTURE IN ARCHAEOLOGY .............................................22

LESSON IV.......................................................................................................................26

METHODS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTICATION ...................................... 26

LESSON V ........................................................................................................................32

DATING METHODS ......................................................................................................32

LESSON VI.......................................................................................................................38

THE INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH IN ARCHAEOLOGY ..........................38

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 2

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
KEY WORDS, CONCEPTS AND ACRONYMS IN THE TEXT

The following words feature in this module while we highlight them at the onset; they are
defined effectively at the end of each lesson. They are:

Lesson 1
Archaeology, prehistory, Artifact, antiquarianism, catastrophism, uniformitarianism,
Evolution and natural selection.

Lesson II
Theory, parsimonius, Historical particulalism, functionalism, processual/ New
archaeology, post-modernism.

Lesson III
Cultural system, Archaeological context in space and time.

Lesson IV
Site, excavation, physical anthropology, classification, typology.

Lesson V
Chronometric dating, Australopithecus Africanus, Pleistocene,Dendrochronology.

Lesson VI
Palaeontology, Geoarchaeology, metallurgist

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 3

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
LESSON 1

DEVELOPMENT OF ARCHAELOGICAL THOUGHT

1.0 INTRODUCTION
In lesson 1, we are going to define the term archaeology and explain why archaeology
ought to be studied. Additionally, we are going to look at the historical development in
archaeology by focusing on Nabonidus, antiquarianism, catastrophism, superimposition,
evolution and the major landmarks in the development of archaeology up to 1900.

1.1 OBJECTIVES
By the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

 Explain the meaning of archaeology and explain why it should be studied.

 Discuss various approaches used prior to 1900 which have helped in the evolution
of archaeology as a subject namely; antiquarianism, catastrophism,
superimposition and evolution.
 List major landmarks in the evolution of archaeology by 1900

1.2 CONTENT
Note:
There are several things which will concern us; they are
definition of archaeology, why study archaeology, goals of
archaeology and the history of archaeology.
Definition: Archaeology.
It comes from two Greek words, “Archios” meaning ancient or old and “logos” meaning
word or study. Archaeology can be defined as the study of the past, the old or antiquities
as a means of reconstructing the past.
Archaeology can comprehensively be defined as a science discipline, which aims at
systematically studying the human cultural and social past through excavation,
description, explanation, and analysis of humans‟ past artifacts in the content in which
they are found (Mutoro, 1992)
The word artifact is a Latin word derived from “ante” meaning skill or art and “facere”
meaning to make. It thus means items of material culture made with skill.
Excavation has its origin from a Latin word “excavatus”, which means to dig from the
ground, today the word excavation means digging the ground in a deliberate attempt to
uncover or expose by digging the ground.
Archaeology has always been confused with prehistory. What is the difference between
the two?
Prehistory is a discipline of recounting coherently the events of man‟s past before written
records. Archaeology on the other hand covers both the prehistoric period and almost all
the time that has elapsed since the advent of written records. So the prehistorian may be
an archaeologist and vice verse, but the two are not completely synonymous.
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 4
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
Relationship between archaeology and other disciplines
Archaeology is a sub branch of anthropology, which is the study of life ways of people
from the past through excavating, analyzing and interpreting the things left behind by
these people. These things include artifacts (tools and pottery), features (e.g. buildings
and graves), and ecofacts that are non-artifactual materials including food remains and
sediments.
Since archaeology concentrates on study of the past, they are limited to working with one
of the basic components of culture: -
Material culture- since the other two components are not preserved in the absence of
people for thousands and in some cases millions of years. These other aspects of culture
are ideas and behaviour patterns.
Archaeology is considered a scientific subject since the process of cultural formation can
be understood better through hypothetical framework, which can be tested against
existing artifact for an easy drawing of conclusions or principles about the subject.
Archaeology also borrows heavily from the natural sciences e.g. physics, chemistry,
biology e.t.c that operate purely on scientific principles.
Archaeology can also be considered as an autonomous subject because it has its own
methodology, which constitutes a set of specialized technology for gathering or
production of cultural information.

Why study archaeology?

1. Archaeology brings to everyone, laymen and scholars the unprecedented
opportunity to see reconstructed ancient site and thus to understand history better.
It thus helps us in understanding the present through carrying out researches about
human behaviour in general.
2. Archaeology is key to understanding our civilization. In the absence of written
records, archaeology is very important in historical reconstruction since it is able
to go back at least four million years when humanity began. It‟s thus the most
profitable inquiry in the search on the origin of things in order to understand the
history of civilization.
3. “ A nation without a past has no soul” according to the first president of
Botswana. It‟s through the study of archaeology that we have been able to honor
the achievements of our people. This is because the concern of the past is basic to
humanity since the traditional fabric shared by members of a particular society
was the source of their solidarity and pride. If we take an example from
Zimbabwe, Ghana, Egypt, Kenya and Israel, we note that: on attainment of
independence Southern Rhodesia changed her name to Zimbabwe after its largest
archaeological monument; - Gold Coast changed to Ghana –after the ruins of one
of the ancient kingdoms in West Africa, despite the fact that this kingdom is not
situated where modern Ghana is. The Egyptians call their national football team
pharaohs-after the achievement of their ancient rulers who contributed greatly in
the field of science, mathematics e.t.c. Kenya on her part is considered as a
country with the longest history from palaeontological and archaeological
materials recovered here. Israel on the other hand sends its recruit on graduation
or passing out parade to an archaeological site (Masada) where they swear to
defend Israel the way zealots who died defending Masada did. In this instant,
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 5
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
Jewish defenders held Masada during the revolt of A.D 66-73 (Bahn, 1996).
Rather than surrender to the mighty of Rome, 960 defenders committed suicide.
In this respect therefore, archaeology help emerging nations establish a cultural
heritage.
4. Archaeology has much to offer in assisting historians and other specialists
working from written sources or records particularly those interested in oral
traditions. The use of archaeology in establishing architectural history, settlement
sites, industry, trade and every day life of the Muslim towns of East Africa or the
West African town is too obvious to detail. In other words, archaeology is vital in
collaborating or criticizing other evidence for knowledge reconstruction.
5. Archaeology is studied because individuals want to pursue a career in such areas
as research scientists, teacher or scholars, company executives, journalism,
publisher, cultural resource officer and business advisor e.t.c.
i) Research scientists are n great demand in National Museums and
National Archives. In the museum, archaeology graduates are
employed as curators and education officers where they act as site
interpreters and conservationists. In this respect they are also useful to
tourist industry since they interpret the site thus promoting cultural
tourism. Indeed, Kenya Wildlife Service and other conservationist
bodies all over the world need to employ archaeologists because they
will be able to explain human contributions to the evolution of the
landscapes currently occupied by wildlife. As research scientists, they
act as educators and formulators of policies that act as a guide towards
human and natural studies. Again, if we have to talk about African
renaissance like President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa, we need to
have informed policy makers especially in the past African
achievement so that we can learn from them and face the future with
confidence.
ii) Teachers, though not well paid and in time are able to communicate
vast knowledge of human experience to the young generation.
iii) Company executives with an archaeological, social science and
historical bias are in great demand in the western world especially in
areas of commerce and industry because these graduates have
exceptional analytical skills necessary to make informed decisions.
Such companies spend less on consultancy since such graduates are
able to put temporal experience on that company at anytime. Its worth
noting that such graduates have knowledge about particular problems
which took place in the past and how they were resolved.
iv) Journalism: Archaeology and other social scientists are the only people
qualified to react to western propaganda since they understand how
those societies have evolved. Western rhetoric‟s and biases can be
counteracted by producing local programs for the media or by
becoming full time journalists like Kwendo Opanga, Warigi Gitau,
John Kamau, and e.t.c. in our local media industries.
Likewise we can romantise archaeology and produce television
programs like it is done elsewhere. Such epics as Conan, Robinson and
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 6
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
Grovanni Belsoni- the grave robber have been produced and are
hilariously charming and their producers have made a fortune. These
are based on the archaeological or historical episodes,
v) Publisher: Archaeologists can work in tandem with producers of books
and add such topics as evolution e.t.c and encourage children, scholars
and general public to read.
vi) Legal advisors on business matters to the custom departments and
businessmen. Archaeologists can advise the business community on
the need of giving information concerning meaning or symbols on
curios before selling them. This helps to avoid illegal or illicit trade
especially in stolen artifacts e.g. the current president of Mali as an
archaeologist has instituted legislation concerning the sale of such
items.
vii) Scholars: many archaeologists are engaged in research and teaching in
many university and research centers all over the world. While here
some act as consultants on matters concerning cultural resource
management or more specifically archaeological heritage
management.
6. Archaeology is also studied for its intrinsic value where it‟s learned for its own
sake. Graham Clarke confirms this when he wrote “ the study of prehistory stand
in no more need of justification than the exploration of physical nature and
mathematical properties of the universe…” In this case archaeology enlarges the
range of human experience and enriches the quality of life.

In conclusion therefore, archaeology is studied because it offers many solutions to

humanity and as such no development can take place without it. In this respect South
Africa, Botswana, Mali, and Namibia have integrated it into their curriculum in all levels
of their education.

Goals of Archaeology
They are basically three:
i) The form of the past
ii) The function to which the cultural remains were put.
iii) The processes that led to the development and change in early man‟s cultures.
The form of the past.
In studying the form of the past an archaeologist is concerned with the physical
description and classification of the recovered archaeological evidence. By analyzing the
form, an archaeologist is able to outline the description of the remains of past societies in
both time and space

Functions of past cultural remains.

An analysis of form enables an archaeologist to determine the possible uses to which the
cultural remains were put. The determination of function ultimately leads to the
reconstruction of ancient customs, behaviour patterns and beliefs.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 7

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
Process of change
To understand processes of culture development and change, an archaeologist does not
deal with simple questions of when and by who, but deals with questions that require
explanation, that is, how and why in addition to what and when e.g. how did cultures
change? Why did they change? Are typical questions that concern an archaeologist?
(Sharer and Atmore 1979)

History and development of archaeology

The earliest known archaeological probing or investigations are reckoned to be those of
King Nabonidus of Babylon who in the 6th century B.C excavated a temple floor down to
a foundation laid nearly 2000years earlier. He was concerned with tracing the floor plans
of ruined temples and collecting artifacts from this excavation. His efforts were directed
towards the correct restoration of these temples in line with his reforms and his emphasis
on the linear descent of kings. Nabonidus was not an early archaeologist, however, much
of his techniques may have resembled those of the 19th century excavators. However, his
interest in the past is clear, his daughters‟ house had a special room to house her
collections of local antiquities. In other words, he may be regarded as the first
archaeologist in the sense that he carried out systematic excavations, recorded them and
displayed to the public in what was to become a museum.
In the Eastern Balkans a 5th century Thracian princess had a collection of stone axes in
her grave. Even divine emperors were not immune to the attraction of archaeology. The
historian Suetonus informs us that the Roman Emperors from Augustus in the 1st century
B.C had collected huge skeletons of extinct sea and land monsters popularly known as
giant bones and the weapons of ancient heroes. These interests in ancient heroes can be
traced back to Homer often considered the father of archaeology. It was Homer who was
instrumental in turning peoples eyes to the past through his descriptions of the Trojan war
in the Iliad, and of people‟s from different lands in the Odyssey (Bahn 1996).
Generally, there were groups of people who were instrumental to the development of
archaeology. These include: the antiquarians, catastrophists, uniformitarianists,
evolutionist, e.t.c.

ANTIQUARIANISM
The term antiquarianism was applied to those people who were interested in recovering
ancient remains so that they could preserve the past. This practice began about the 13th
century A.D after society had developed an interest in knowledge again. During this
period, which is popularly known as the renaissance or rebirth of knowledge, scholars
started to read the works of Greek and Roman philosophers like Plato, Aristotle,
Lucretius and Julius Caesar. Those with wealth traveled in the classical world to search
and collect the material culture of the past for their cabinets in their houses. During this
period, the main aim was to collect treasures and arts for private purposes especially
among the rich, (nobles, clergy, and the rulers). In Italy for example, these group of
people was known as dilettanti meaning those delighted in the arts. During the search for
the past, material culture, some small-scale excavations were conducted but with the
intention of collecting and preserving ancient antiquities for their own sake. Popes like
Sixtus IV and Julius II and III and Alexander IV, sponsored people to make collections of
antiquities for their parishes. There were other antiquarians who wanted economic gains
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 8
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
from ancient antiquities. Such antiquarians include Giovanni Batista Belzoni who was a
thief and grave robber. He raided Egyptian pharaonic treasures and sold them to the
highest bidders. During the same period it was also fashionable for politicians to furnish
their houses with abandoned statues and artifacts. Therefore, the churchmen, politicians
and the nobility competed with each other on the amount of ancient collections one had.
The collections of antiquities also spread to other parts of Europe especially France and
Britain, where collectors started going round all over Europe and other parts to collect
objects. Most objects collected during this time became the nucleus of the objects found
in the modern museums e.g. Ashmolean and Victorian museums in Britain. The treasure
hunters, who were the founders of these museums, stole these antiquities.

Apart from the collections, serious works on archaeology began to emerge, William
Camden in 1586, was able to produce a book Britannia that was a comprehensive
directory of British antiquities. The antiquarians were however, not the founders of the
field of archaeology. By 18th century many development had been made in what was to
become archaeology and geology. These developments were based on several theories.

CATASTROPHISM
During the first half of the 19th century many discoveries were made of artifacts and
human bones in association with extinct animals suggesting man‟s antiquity going
beyond 6000 years. These created anxiety and curiosity for an explanation in a hitherto
dogmatic Christian Europe. To explain some of the mass extinctions of animals in the
past, some theologians and religious minded scientists (geologists) argued that
widespread flooding and other catastrophes had taken place on earth before the creation
of man. In fact, they stated that the last of these floods was the one in which Noah and his
ark were involved. Volcanic eruptions and earthquakes, such as those described by Plato
in his story of Atlatis were almost as popular as the flood among people who sought to
account for strange observations. The geologist behind this flooding theory was called
Georges Cuvier and his theory known as catastrophism. If catastrophism were to be given
credence, the history of the world would have to be seen as full of catastrophes one
disaster after the other, everywhere and all the time. Yet, the biggest catastrophe recorded
since the flood. The eruption of Volcano Krakatoa in Indonesia in 1870s did not create
beaches high on land or significantly affect the area of more than a few hundred miles.
Indeed, only one ship was carried by tidal waves generated by eruption to 2.5km inland.
Surely there was something amiss in the theory (Hyden, 1993). Nevertheless, Georges
Cuvier is credited with the transformation of paleontology into a complex science; indeed
his theory got a lot of support from many geologists and scientists of the time.
From the 17th and 19th century, ideas about evolution were rudimentary and sporadic, and
a few people believed that the world was created before 4004 B.C. a date calculated by a
Bishop on the basis of the genealogies recorded in the Bible. Genesis chapter 1:1stated
that God had created the world and its inhabitants in six days. The story of Adam and Eve
provided an entirely consistent explanation of the creation of humankind and world
populations. Prior to the 19th century, most Europeans derived their knowledge from the
Bible and the accounts of classical Greeks and the Romans. Because of these writings,
the earth was given such short span of existence that there simply was no time for

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 9

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
prehistory. Most scholars agreed that the world was only about 6000years old though
there was considerable disagreement over the exact time and date of creation.
Jewish rabbinical calculations from the Hebrew massoteric text showed that the world
began 3740B.C. Roman Catholic tradition based on the Latin vulgate translation of the
Bible placed the creation in 5199B.C and most English speaking protestants accepted the
17th century archbishop James Ussher‟s calculations of the time of creation as 4004 B.C.
Usshers dates were placed in the margins of the early 18th century editions of the bible
making them seem even more authoritative. Ushers calculations were refined by Dr.
John Lightfoot of Cambridge University who published a monograph in 1642 in which he
declared that man was created at 9.00 am on October 23rd 4004 B.C. This bizarre
calculation soon became a theological dogma and was defended with almost frenzied
fanatism by theologians in the early 19th century when another group of experts showed
that humans had lived on earth much longer than a mere 6000years.

UNIFORMITARIANISM
James Hutton (1726-1777) in his book “Theory of the earth” proposed that natural and
gradual processes, which were still going on at the time, formed the earth. He saw the
geological processes as being erosion, accumulation, weathering and earthquake and
argued that these processes were more likely to bring about geological change than
successive catastrophes. Many geologists including those who had favoured Ussharian
chronology accepted Hutton‟s theory. This theory was later popularized and published by
the famous geologist Sir Charles Lyell (1797-1875) in his three volume „principles of
geology‟ as the doctrine or theory of „uniformitarianism‟.
Sir Charles Lyell summarized the layering up of the earth‟s crust with such simplicity
that those specialized and the general public understood clearly. He for instance,
demonstrated that in any part of the earth‟s crust, the layers lying below were laid down
earlier and are therefore older than those above, which were laid down later. He thus
proved that life on earth was much older than 6000years; he called this the theory of
superimposition (Sharer and Atmore 1979).
He qualified this with a condition of there having been no previous disturbance due to
faulting or earthquakes.

THE THREE AGE THEORY

One of the strongest archaeological theories- in power, simplicity, and testability. The
theory is old than Darwinian theory of evolution. Its credited to a man called Christiansen
Jorgensen Thomsen. Thomsen had just been appointed Curator of the new Danish
National Museum of Antiquities in 1816. Like many museums of the time, this one came
to be a reposity or collection for all sorts of natural and casual things, objects of historical
value and a lot of other items that various notable families saw fit to donate. Many
smaller local museums are still like this today. The early museum collections tended to be
more chaotic than consummate and more entopic than enlightening. Labels often tell of
and were never put in place. As a new acquisition accumulated, boxes of the
miscellaneous materials pilled up, materials from various locations in Denmark, materials
arranged according to their donors and other according to their artistic merits, materials
sorted by size and by weight, materials arranged in every conceivable manner. These
groupings were not types in the archaeological sense because they had no connection to
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 10
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
interpretation of the past. They were simply convenient ways of ordering things for
Museum curators who worried endlessly about storage, preservation and description.
Such categories are now referred to as classifications. Classifications are simply
groupings of objects with no necessary relevance to any archaeological problem.

Christiansen Thomsen was confronted by the problem of organizing his collection. He

began by sorting the Museum‟s oldest holdings into groups according to materials. On
one large table, perhaps, he placed all old objects made of stone, on another table, all the
old bronze and on a third the old objects made of iron. Other tables were preserved for
other items; our interests are on the three categories.. Christiansen Thomsen realized with
excitement a pattern in these old objects, which came to be the three-age theory.
(Hyden, 1993).
Thomsen argued that the human race first had a stone technology (stone age) the
gradually developed bronze tools (bronze age) and finally developed iron tools, (iron
age).

THEORY OF EVOLUTION AND NATURAL SELECTION

The theory of biological evolution was greatly influenced by the theory of cultural
evolution. One of the most famous proponents of this theory was Charles Darwin. In
1859, this theory found more support with the concept of biological evolution by Darwin
in his book “The Origin of Species”. Darwin theory of evolution supported the long
geologic history of the earth as interpreted by Charles Lyell. This theory also showed that
a process of natural selection in which better-adapted forms produce more offspring and
multiplied while those that were less fitted died out. (Survival of the fittest) and thus was
able to explain mass extinctions as well as diversity of life on earth (Glyn 1975, Sharer
and Atmore 1979).
Generally, by the beginning of the 19th century, most governments had realized the
importance of preserving antiquities therefore they started to support people to go to
various places to collect and excavate various antiquities. It‟s during this period that the
principles of archaeology were established.

Main Landmarks in Archaeology

1. Establishment of the principles of stratigraphy.
2. Invention of the process of preserving and analyzing artifacts.
3. Introduction of the techniques of survey and sampling.
4. The use of the multi-disciplinary approaches in archaeological research.
5. The development of the theories that are useful in analyzing and interpreting the
archaeological record.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 11

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
1.3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

This lesson has outlined what archaeology is and why it should be studied. Further it has
demonstrated the evolution of archaeology from its remote beginning until the 19th
century when most of the principles of archaeology were established.

1.4 REVISION QUESTION

a) What is archaeology and why should it be studied?

b) Briefly discuss the three goals of archaeology.
Discuss the contribution of antiquarianism, uniformitarianism and catastrophism in the
development of archaeology.
a) Assess Darwinism theory of biological evolution.
b) Discuss the Three age theory of cultural evolution.

1.5 FURTHER READING

1. Bahn, P.G. (ed) (1996) The Cambridge Illustrated History of Archaeology.
Cambridge University Press.
2. Fagan, M.B. (1985) In the Beginning. An Introduction to Archaeology. Boston:
Little Brown and Company.
3. Glyn, D (1975) A Hundred and firty years of Archaeology. Cambridge:University
Press.
4. Hyden, B (1993) Archaeology. The Science of Once and Future Things. New
York: Freeman and Company.
5. Mutoro, H.N. (1990) Introduction to African Archaeology. Nairobi:University
Press.
6. Sharer, R.J.$ Ashmore, W. (1979) Fundamentals of Archaeology. Munlo park,
California: The Benjamin publishing company Inc.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 12

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
LESSON II

ARCHAEOLOGICAL THEORIES

2.0 INTRODUCTION
In lesson 1 we looked at the historical development of archaeology hoping to introduce
the subject matter of archaeology and how the practice of the discipline has changed over
time.
In this unit, I am going to try to describe theories used in archaeology. In this respect, I
will explain what a theory is and what are the characteristics of a good archaeological
theory. I am also going to describe the major theories that have been used in interpreting
archaeological data. These include traditional, processual and postmodernism and
methods. The importance of these cannot be over emphasized since these approaches
dominate the discourse in the subject.

2.1 OBJECTIVES

By the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

Explain three characteristics of a good archaeological theory.

Explain three theories that were developed in the 19th century which have continued
to influence archaeological discourse up to date.
Explain and be able to employ processual and post-processual paradigms in the
analysis of archaeological phenomena.
Identify the strengths and weaknesses of each paradigm.

2.2 CONTENT

THEORIES
Definition:
A theory is a statement of the relationship between abstract concepts. It‟s substantially
separated from every day‟s observations of things and events by at least one level of
generalization and often by many levels. Theory that population pressure led to
domestication for instance is a casual statement about the abstract concepts of population
pressure and domestication.
Characteristics of a good theory.
A good theory is predictive, parsimonious (simple) and powerful
1. Predictive
Theories that generate hypothesis that accurately predict what would be observed are
obviously desirable thus, if hypotheses derived from the theory of evolution predict that
transitional forms of fossils between apes and humans should be found and subsequent
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 13
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
excavations confirms such transitional fossils really do exist, the theory of evolution has
better qualities than any theory that does not predict the existence of such fossils.
2. Parsimonious
A theory is also considered to be good if it‟s relatively simple (Parsimonious). The more
complex the theory, the greater the likelihood that some of it would be wrong. Good
theories explain exceptions away easily, such as why some objects fly up instead of
falling to the earth as the theory of gravity leads one to expect. Poor theories must rely on
cumbersome and complex explanations to account for exceptions.
2. Powerful
A good theory must be relatively powerful. Theories that explain a broad range of
phenomena in the universe are much more powerful than theories that deal with a very
narrow range of things thus the theory of gravity and the theory of relativity are very
powerful theories in the realm of science today. In contrast, a theory that explains a taboo
on eating cows (Hindus) by reference to particular culture‟s values system is less
powerful because it accounts for only a very limited range of phenomena in a single
culture.
Today, scientists are trying to develop powerful theories in four broad areas. This
corresponds to the four major questions about human existence that almost everyone
would like to be answered.
a) How and why did the universe come into being? (In this area, the distinction
between physics and metaphysics is sometimes blurred).
b) How did life begin and what forces influence its evolution?
c) How do the brain work and what accounts for consciousness, intuition,
premonition and even esoteric phenomena.
d) What is culture? How does it evolve? How does it mould our behaviour?
So far, no scientist has been skilled and objective enough to evoke and usefully interpret
the theoretical images necessary to answer these fundamental questions. We have to work
at a lower level of theory, a level where relative certainty is achievable (Hyden, 1993)

ACTIVITY:

Using the above criteria for a good archaeological theory, examine any one theory that
has been used to interpret archaeological culture.

EVOLUTIONARY THEORY AND THE RISE OF RACISM

Towards the end of the 18th century and beginning of the 19th century, there was a shared
commitment by European archaeologists towards an evolutionary approach to various
cultures, which led to a close relationship between ethnology and archaeology. In Europe,
this alignment was based on a belief in unilinear cultural evolution. It was accepted that
modern cultures could be arranged in series, which ranged from the simplest to the
complex groups. All this belief in unilinear cultural evolution arose from problems
scholars faced in trying to explain why some cultures were considered advanced and
others primitive. This belief in cultural evolution led to the rise of nationalism among
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 14
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
most European countries. This Nationalist tendency was encouraged by Napoleon‟s
conquest in several parts of the world and the contact this conquest brought between
European and other cultures. The realization that there were groups of people different
from Europeans encouraged intellectuals to explain that the differences were as result of
biological differences and not due to the different environments where these cultures
were developed. Different races were thus not equal. These intellectuals even tried to
justify Charles Darwin‟s theory of different natural selection processes which culminated
to these differences, for examples a group which was culturally developed (European‟s)
were thought to be both culturally and biologically more developed than Africans and
other colored people of the earth. Those groups that were culturally advanced were the
same as those who natural selection had produced superior individuals with self-control.
Those who were less advanced were like children.
According to Darwin, cultural evolution was an extension of biological evolution and this
spheres of evolution went hand in hand. The view that cultural evolution and biological
evolution go hand in hand was introduced in archaeology by John Lubbock (1237-1913)
when he argued that both views of Darwin could be applied to archaeology. He further
argued that if extinct elephants could provide information about the behaviour of modern
elephants therefore looking at modern people, you could get behaviour of the past people.
He continued to argue that because of natural selection, human groups differed from one
another not only culturally but also in their biological capacities as well.
Modern Europeans were seen as products of intensive cultural and biological evolution
while African and other less technologically advanced societies were seen to be both
culturally, intellectually and emotionally more primitive than the civilized people
(Trigger,1995).
Lubbock also maintained that due to differences in natural selection, criminals among the
Europeans and the commoners and the poor were biologically inferior to those people of
middle and upper classes. He saw then that modern tribal groups were unable to control
their nature and their intellect resembled those of kids and their languages lacked abstract
words and at the same time these were incapable of understanding anything, “Savages are
slave to the passions being unable to control their anger or to follow any specific cause of
action for more than a short time”. This view of the primitive nature of the native people
is the basis on which the British used to colonize most countries in the world arguing that
British colonization was good for they came to civilize and advance the so called “
primitive cultures”. This view was also used as a basis of European dominance over other
groups of people. In other words colonization was a civilization measure because the
colonizers were to teach and help these inferior societies to develop.

RACISM IN AFRICAN ARCHAEOLOGY

By the beginning of the 19th century archaeological work in Africa was carried out
haphazardly by European amateurs and professionals whose aim was to advance the view
that there was nothing good among Africans. The earliest recorded excavations were
carried out by a Swiss named Andrew Sparman (1876) who dug a number of holes in
present South Africa where without getting anything substantive concluded that there was
irrefutable evidence that a more powerful and numerous population had lived in South
Africa before they were downgraded to present day Hottentots and savages.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 15

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
When systematic archaeological research began in 1890s, both professional
archaeologists and colonizers regarded the individual cultures as the living museum
of the human past for instance, cultures that had not changed much from the stones to
the hunters and gatherers. This was the start of what was called ethno archaeology.
Ethno archaeology is the explanation of archaeological materials using modern
societies. It was argued that most societies encountered had technology based on
stone tools and generally rudimentary social and political organizations.
However, the truth is that in Africa there were highly developed societies with
kingdoms and cities akin to those of Europe during the same time. Unfortunately,
these centers of civilization were associated by these Euro centric scholars to
diffusion from the North e.g. Great Zimbabwe where there were massive stones
structures, Ethiopia and elsewhere, where there was evidence of advanced civilization
were said to have been established by Hamites who were supposed to have been a
light skinned people who had migrated via Egypt to the South. These hamites alleged
brought civilization to the black people.

ACTIVITY:

What is the role of theory in archaeology? How did the misuse of evolutionary theory
contribute to racism?

HISTORICAL PARTICULARISM
Around the turn of the 19th century, the founder of North America anthropology, Franz
Boas advanced this theory. It gained prominence in the mid 20th century. It viewed
culture to be very complex which many varied forces affect. Because of this, historical
particularism treated each culture as unique. A culture was viewed as an entity
understable only in its own terms- an approach called cultural relativism.
Boas, maintained that cultures were subject to so many influences e.g. history,
environments, contact with other cultures, individual innovations, the mental makeup the
varying concepts embodied in the words of a language and that it was extremely unlikely
that any useful generalization could be made about cultures.
He considered archaeology to be a branch of anthropology and historical particularism
was the nearest thing to a theoretical orientation that archaeology or anthropology ever
produced.
Operationally, it heavily emphasized the story of mental life of cultures, since mental
activity is less amenable to evolutionist sequences of ranking than any other factor. He
further argues that all cultures should be understood in their own terms and no culture
was inferior to any other.
Offering their own version of diffusionism, the historical particularists argue that ideas
changed largely as a result of contact between peoples, in the same way that diseases are
spread. This approach was also called the normative approach.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 16

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
Why did particularists shun generalization?
One reason was that Franz Boas was a European Jew and had bitter experiences with
anti-Semitism. He had felt strongly that the expertise of scientists particularly,
anthropologists should be used to demonstrate that all races and cultures are of equal
worth. He saw any generalization about culture or any evolutionary model as a threat.
Unfortunately, their Historical Particularism was to banish all generalization from Social
Science. When Historical Particularism was tested, it failed miserably and left a residue
of patterned cultural change and evolution. Indeed, most archaeologists now feel that
Historical Particularism was an extreme and somewhat misdirected approach. (Hyden,
1993)

Note:
It should be noted that Franz Boas ideas are still popular among
Jewish scholars.

FUNCTIONALSM IN ARCHAEOLOGY
This idea emerged when scholars realized that ethnicity would not be known from
archaeological data. Functionalism shifted archaeological eye from focusing on the origin
of the artifacts to what it was used for. The main idea of this approach was to understand
human behaviour. Scholars from United Kingdom and France rejected the idea of
diffusion of origin from Egypt and adopted a structural approach which was propagated
by scholars like Branslaw Malinowski and Radcliffe Brown who argued that human
behaviour can be understood in relation to social system conceived to be made up of
functionally interdependent elements.
Malinowski argued that institutions that comprised social systems were grounded on
biological needs, which compliment each other. This approach was called social
anthropology to distinguish it from ethnology, which was associated with unilinear
evolution.
Social anthropology was grounded on the work of a French socialist E. Durkheim who
saw society as made up of systems of interdependent parts. He viewed individual aspects
of culture to be significant in terms of their functional relationships to specific social
systems. He rejected the cultural historical view that social systems and cultural norms
that were associated with them could be understood as mechanical collection of traits that
diffusion had brought largely as a result of operation of chance. He argued that societies
constituted integrated systems whose institutions were interrelated like parts of a living
organism. Thus according to him, no change could occur in any parts of a social system
without bringing about varying degree of change in other parts of a social system. This
approach encouraged archaeologists to investigate how societies had functioned as
systems. People asked questions why artifacts were made and why they were made in
particular environments. This growing interest in the relation of human societies and
environment setups encouraged the functional view of human behaviour, which in turn
stimulated the analysis of past environment and ecological adaptations of cultures in their
environment.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 17

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
It was assumed that the natural environment set limits to the forms of adaptations that
were possible rather than determine the specific nature of the response that was also
influenced by historical tradition and unpredictable human choices.
The leading archaeological functionalist of this time was Gordon Childe who was an
economist and a Marxist functionalist. According to him, different cultures were
determined by economic life these cultures led.
Another functionalist was Graham Clark, an ecological functionalist whose works look
down to the environments and how it shaped different people.
Another type of functionalism was settlement archaeology pioneered by Julien Steward
and Gordon Willey who observed that though ecological factors played significant roles
in shaping settlement patterns, they were however other aspects as well which could be
seen from archaeological records. They saw settlements patterns as sources of
information about other factors of human behaviour.
The advantage of settlement patterns over artifacts was, while artifacts were found in
many contexts where they are being disposed settlement patterns provided about the
settings in which human activities were carried out. In settlement archaeology therefore
individual sites ceased to be studied as ends in themselves or be regarded as
representative of a particular region, they formed networks in which single sites played
very different but contemporary roles instead.
Sites surveys no longer sort to locate the largest or most representative site for excavation
but instead sort to recover information that was important in its own rights for
archaeology analysis.
Settlement patterns were viewed not only as important in understanding social and
political questions but also as a source of information about demographic trends and
about religious institutions of prehistoric societies.

Note:
You should note that functionalism contributed to systems thinking
or theory in the study of archaeology.

CULTURE HISTORY THEORY

It means, quite simply, the description of human cultures as they extend back thousands
of years into the past. Culture history is discerned from the study of sites and the artifacts
and structures in them in a vertical (temporal) and horizontal (spatial) context.
Most of this activity is descriptive, but this is an essential preliminary to any work on life
ways or culture process.
Culture process is in the arena of processual archaeology. It means understanding how
culture changes. This is because; every cultural system is in a constant state of change.
By examining the relationship between technological and political subsystems we can
understand the processes by which culture changes. The word process implies a patterned
sequence of events, one event leading to the other.

PROCESSUAL ARCHAEOLOGY OR NEW ARCHAEOLOGY

It was proclaimed to the world in an article by an American archaeologist Lewis Binford
in 1962. British archaeologist, David Clarke and Colin Renfrew, soon joined him. It‟s
based on deductive research methodology that employs a research design, formulation of
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 18
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
research hypothesis, testing of these against basic data. These hypotheses are tested
against basic data and some are discarded, while others are refined again and again until
the factors that affect cultural change are isolated in a highly specific form.
New archaeology, rooted in cultural anthropology renounced the historical orientation of
the traditional archaeology. It supported and accepted the concept of cultural evolution
and the use of systems theory. System model or theory sees each society operating
through the interrelationships of its individual components say, the natural environments,
population density or available technology and that a change in one lead to a change in
others-say religious practices.
They strove to emulate the sciences by seeking to explain cultural process. They were
very optimistic that they could deduce valid laws of cultural development and change. To
accomplish this as we have stated, they adopted the scientific method –formulating
hypothesis or models, deducing how they would work then testing them by carefully
designing projects. Their search for objective demonstrable explanation,, also led new
archaeologists to stress quantitative analysis of data, using computers for random
sampling , significant testing and other types of statistical analysis. There were heated
debates concerning new archaeology between its opponents and propagators. Fortunately,
the rhetoric on both sides has become more moderate over the years and its contribution
(new archaeology) to the study of archaeology remains enormous.

POST-MODERNISM
The word derives from modernity. Modern age officially began at the end of the 15 th
century. This is when science and reason replaced religion as pillars of societal growth
and development. Some of the leading moral and civic notions of the age of racism
included such pronouncement as universal humanity, justice and equality, government by
consent, the free market, toleration and sanctity of the private sphere. To operate within
the confines of these pillars was to be modern.
Indeed at the heart of modernity was the trust of faith in scientific reason understood as
the source not only of vast powers but also of authoritative guidance as to how to use
these powers. This authoritative guidance has tragically led the western world into the
habit of totaling reality and setting parameters for human behaviour. As a result, western
civilization in its original form is authoritarian and oppressive.
However, modern rationalism has been opposed by succeeding generation of philosophic
critics such as Rousseau and Heidegger ( Kisiang‟ani, 2000). They argue that rationalism
is incapable of providing an acceptable, profound, diverse, creative and historical account
of what is truly human.
Postmodernism is therefore a rebellion against rationalism of western civilization. It is a
rebellion against all magnificent “ meta-narrative” (Grand theories). This is because
human life is more complex and enriching than narrow western approaches.
For postmodernist society, the world should never again succumb to solid, unitary and
authoritative reality. Human emancipation will obtain in giving each other space to
recognize what is available from various parts of the world without necessarily forcing
others to see things through their own perspectives.
In this way, the world of generalized communications explodes into a multiplicity of
local rationalities, ethnic, sexual, religious or aesthetic minorities that finally bespeak for

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 19

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
themselves and are no longer covered into silence by the ideal of single and universal
representation of reality.
Postmodernism therefore make knowledge immensely subjective, individualistic and
fictional. Yet still, the approach has found application among a few archaeologists.
An Australian archaeologist called Peter Hiscock has written an article entitled “The New
Age of alternative archaeology in Australia”. In it, what one sees is “unconventional”
ways of explaining archaeological occurrences or materials. These include “mysticism”
which cannot be proven rationally. This perspective accepts biblical chronology
(Ussherian), presence of ancient Egyptian culture in foreign land (Australia) without
explaining how that culture reached there in the first place; pilgrimage of ancient cultures
and gods from other parts of Asia to Australia e.t.c.
In this way the chronology of humans in Australia is extended backwards but without
scientific proof.
In other words, postmodernism (as used in archaeology) is not a specific school of
thought, but a persistent challenge to the assumptions of western European culture. Its
impact is not clear, for most recent philosophical influences upon archaeology have
generalized an attitude that resembles modernism challenging itself, rather than fully-
fledged postmodernism.
Unlike in history, where a few reknown scholars like Atieno Adhiambo (Rice University,
U.S.A and Achille Mbembe, a former Executive secretary of council of Development in
Social Science Research Institute in Africa (CODESRIA) between 1996-2000, I am not
aware of any African Archaeologist using postmodernism approach. Either they dislike it
or they do not know about it.
Note:
New age of alternative archaeology has been more fictional than
real
2.3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

In this lesson, characteristics of a good theory are discussed. Also discussed are the
various theories that have been used in archaeological discourse.

2.4 REVISION QUESTIONS

What are the characteristics of a good archaeological theory?

Discuss racism and show how it has influenced the interpretation of
archaeology.
Analyze the key features on any three of the following approaches to
the study of archaeology.
a) Diffusionism
b) Historical particularism
c) Functionalism
d) System theory
e) New archaeology
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 20
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
2.5.FURTHER READINGS
7. Fagan, M.B. (1985) In the Beginning. An Introduction to Archaeology. Boston:
Little Brown and Company.
8. Hiscock, P. (1996). “The New Age of alternative Archaeology in Australia”.
9. Hole, F. $ Heizer, R.F. (1973) An Introduction to Prehistoric Archaeology. New
York; HoltRinehart $Winston, Inc.
10. Hyden, B (1993) Archaeology. The Science of Once and Future Things. New
York: Freeman and Company.
11. Kisiangani, K.N.W. (2000) Demystifying postmodernism in the EAJHSSR Vol 2
No 2
12. Sharer, R.J.$ Ashmore, W. (1979) Fundamentals of Archaeology. Munlo park,
California: The Benjamin publishing company Inc.
13. Stiebirg, W.H. (1987) Uncovering the Past. New York: Facts on file press.
14. Trigger, B (1995) A History of Archaeology Thought. Cambridge: University
Press.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 21

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
LESSON III
THE CONCEPT OF CULTURE IN ARCHAEOLOGY

3.0 INTRODUCTION
In lesson II, we looked at the various paradigms, which have influenced the practice of
archaeology.
In this unit, I am going to try to describe what constitutes archaeological culture.
Additionally, I will focus on how social patterns can be reconstructed through analysis of
material culture.
Finally, I will discuss archaeological context.

3.1 OBJECIVES

By the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

 Explain archaeological cultures.
 Explain how man‟s social past can be reconstructed through archaeological
analysis.
 Explain archaeological context and its importance.

3.2 CONTENT
HUMAN CULTURE.
Everyone lives within a cultural context, one that is qualified by a label like “middle-
class American”, “Kikuyu”, “Maasai” or “Dot.com”. These labels confine a certain
characteristic objects or behaviour patterns typical of this particular culture for instance,
we associate hamburgers with middle class American culture and braided hair decorated
in red ochre and spear welding with maasai. Maasai are thought to have spent their time
acquiring and raiding their neighbors for cattle while the Kikuyu were great farmers.
Some of these labels may be true or may be stereotypes.
Each human being has its recognizable cultural style which shapes the behaviour of its
members, their political and judicial institutions and their morals. These distinctive
characteristics stem from a people‟s complex adaptation to a wide range of ecological,
societal and cultural factors (Fagan, 1983).
Human culture is unique because much of its content is transmitted from generation to
generation by sophisticated communication systems. Formal education, religious beliefs,
and day-to-day social intercourse all transmit culture and allow societies to develop
complex and ongoing adaptations to their survival. Since communication systems also
help rapid cultural change to take place, when for example, less advanced societies come
into contact with the more advanced ones. Culture is a potential guide for our behaviour
created through generations of human experience. It provides a design for living that
helps mould our responses to different situations.
Human beings are the only animals that use culture as the primary means of adapting to
the environment. While biological evolutions for example, has protected the polar bear
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 22
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
from artic winters, only humans make thick clothes and snow igloos in the artic and live
in light, thatched shelters in the tropics. Culture is an adaptive system; it is a buffer
between ourselves, the environment and other human societies. Through the long
millennia of prehistory, human culture has become more elaborate. If this cultural buffer
were now removed, one would be helpless and most probably doomed to extinction. As
our only means of adaptation, human culture is always adjusting to environmental,
technological and societal change.
Culture can be subdivided into many different ways. Language economics, technology,
religion and political and social organization are but a few interacting elements. These
elements shape one another and blend to form a whole. For example, the distribution of
water and food supplies as well as flexible social organization helps determine the
distribution of home base among the San of Kalahari Desert in Southern Africa.
While culture is the dominant factor in determining social behaviour, human society is
the vehicle that carries our culture. Societies are groups of interacting organizers. Insects
and other animals as well as humans have societies. But only humans have culture as well
as a system of habits and customs that we acquire and pass on as our distinctive means of
adapting to the environment.
All definitions of culture are theoretical formulations, concepts that are means of
explaining cultures and human behaviour in terms of shared ideas a group of people may
hold. The concept of culture provides anthropological archaeologists with a means to
explain the products of human activity. When archaeologists study the tangible remains
of the past, they see a patterned reflection of the culture that produced them, of the shared
ideas a group of prehistoric people. This patterning of archaeological finds is critically
important for it reflects patterned behaviour in the past.

ACTIVITY:

Discuss any labeled cultural group explaining reasons for such

labeling.

CULTURAL SYSTEMS
Many of the interacting components of culture are highly perishable. So far, no one has
been able to dig up a religious philosophy or an unwritten language. Archaeologists have
to work with the tangible remains of human activity that still survive in the ground. But
intangible aspects of human culture radically affect these surviving remains of human
activity; every copper ornament found in an excavation is a reflection, not only of the
technology that made it but of the values and uses of which a society placed on such
objects. Ancient tools are patterned in themselves, but they are a patterned reflection of
the culture that produced them. Archaeologists spend much time studying the linkages
between past culture and their archaeological remains.
Anthropologist Leslie was one of the first to study people‟s means of adapting to the
environment. He argued that human culture is made of many structurally different parts,

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 23

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
which articulate with one another within a total cultural system. This cultural system is
the means where by a human society adapts to its physical and social environment.
All cultural systems articulate with other systems, which also are made up of interacting
sets of variables. One such system is the natural environment. The links between cultural
and environmental systems are such that a change in one system is linked to challenges in
the other. Thus, a major objective of archaeological data. It follows that archaeologists
concerned with cultural systems are more interested in the relationship between different
activities and tools within a cultural system than they are in the activities or tools
themselves. They are profoundly interested in cultural systems within their environmental
context (Fagan, 1983, Sharer and Ashmore 1979).
To be workable any human cultural system depends on its ability to adapt to the natural
environment. A cultural system can be broken into all manner of systems, religious and
ritual subsystems, economic subsystems and so on. Each of these is linked to the others.
Changes from cattle herding to wheat growing, will cause reactions in many others. Such
relationships concern the archaeologist as a measure of the constant changes and
variations in human culture, which can accumulate over long periods of time. These
changes accumulate as cultural systems respond to external and internal stimuli.
By examining the systematic patterning of archaeological finds, we can find out more
about the intangible aspects of human behavior. By dropping their possessions in the
ground or burying their dead in certain ways, people have left vital information about
many more elements in their cultural systems than merely their tomb or skeletal remains.
One can examine the relationship between different individual households by comparing
the artifacts left by each, one can study trading practices by analyzing the products of
metal smiths, one can discover religious beliefs through mapping temple architecture.
Also, the carefully arranged grave offerings in a royal court buried in a communal grave
and the precise and sophisticated recovery of such data is what modern prehistoric
archaeology is all about.

Note:
In analyzing a cultural system, you need to have an open mind in order to
come up with detailed information concerning a site.
CONTEXT
Artifacts are found in archaeological sites. Archaeological sites are far more than just a
collection of artifacts, however, they can contain the remains of dwellings, burials,
storage pits, craft activities and sometimes several occupation levels. Each artifact, each
broken bone or tiny seed, every dwellings has a relationship in space and time to all the
other finds made in a site. An artifact can be earlier, contemporary with or later than its
neighbors in the soil. A thousand obsidian flakes and half completed projectile heads
scattered over an area several square feet in diameter are in themselves merely stone
fragments. But the patterning of all the fragments is significant as it tells us something of
the various manufacturing activities carried out by the person who flaked the thousand
fragments from several chunks of obsidian. In this instance, and many others, the context
of artifacts in time and space is vital ( Fagan, 1983).
To every archaeologist, an artifact is worthless without this context. An artifact removed
from its context in space and time in an archaeological site is merely an object. An
artifact carefully excavated from a recorded archaeological context is an integral past of
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 24
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
our history and as such has far more significance. This context of space and time lies at
the very foundations of modern archaeology.

ACTIVITY:

Why is cultural context very important in the interpretation of

archaeological materials?

3.3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

This lesson has summarized what constitute archaeological culture. Further

it has briefly explained how man‟s social past can be reconstructed through
archaeological analysis. Finally, it has described the meaning of context and
its importance in archaeological explanations.

3.4 REVISION EXERCISE

Discuss the concept of culture in archaeology.

What is an archaeological context?

3.4 REFERENCES
1. Fagan M. Brian: (1983) Archaeology. A brief introduction. (2nd edition) Boston:
Little Brown and company.
2. Sharer, R.J.$ Ashmore, W. (1979) Fundamentals of Archaeology. Munlo park,
California: The Benjamin publishing company Inc.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 25

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
LESSON IV

METHODS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTICATION

4.0 INTRODUCTION
In the previous lesson, we looked at archaeological culture. In this lesson we will
describe methods of archaeological investigation, beginning with site discovery, site
survey, excavation, analysis, interpretation and preservation of archaeological heritage.
Typology and classification of archaeological data will also be described.

4.1 OBJECTIVES

By the end of the lesson, you should be able to:

Describe methods used in site discovery.
Discuss temporal and spatial excavation method.
Explain data analysis and interpretation.
Explain preservation of recovered objects.
Discuss the role of classification and typology in archaeology.

4.2 CONTENT
1. SITE
Archaeologists seem to have always disagreed on what is meant by an archaeological
site. They however agree that sites are those areas on the landscape, which show
material evidence of human activities in the past. One can reject as a site an area that
does not have enough concentration of cultural remains per square meter he or she is
looking for. Therefore the decision whether an area is a site depends on the decision
of an archaeologist. Size of site is determined by the extent and density of visible
surface remains. These remains include, stone tools metal remains, pottery,
ruined buildings, abandoned terraces e.t.c.
Key indicators of an archaeological site.
This include:
i) Those areas, which are conspicuously above the ground level. This can be
stone ruins, pyramids, burial moulds and other related features.
ii) Vegetation cover: In places where the soil has been disturbed e.g. where there
were cattle pens or midden, the vegetation cover may be healthy because of
nitrogen and PH content in that soil. Conversely, stunted vegetation or very
poor vegetation growth may be an indicator of a site e.g. vegetation on
concrete sub surface is usually very short.
iii) Soil colour: In places where human activities had taken place e.g. where
villages had been abandoned you find dark organic soil which when ploughed
show dark zones

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 26

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
iv) Surface finds of the artifacts e.g. where there are concentration of pots or
potsherds, bones, stone tools and other cultural debris that stand out from the
surrounding ground.

ACTIVITY :

Explain the key indicators of an archaeological site and

methods in site discovery.

2. METHODS OF SITE DISCOVERY

a) Accidental
There has been several site discoveries e.g. when Masinga dam was being
constructed, a lot of artifacts were found which showed there was an Iron Age site.
b) Aerial photography
By taking photographs from the plane can one also be able to discover where sites are
located.
c) Remote Sensing
Is the process whereby satellites take pictures of the earth surface and these
photographs reveal the various configurations of the earth surface some of which may
be archaeological sites.
d) Walking and driving
This is by seeking information from locals and moving around the landscape or
terrain recording, drawing sketches and taking photographs of all promising sites.
3. SITE SURVEY
Is the simplest way of getting some ideas about the site extent or size. Site surveys are
done by studying the distribution of surviving features and recording and possibly
collecting artifacts from the surface of various areas. The first form of survey is
mapping.
Mapping enables you to accurately record the survey data. For service features like
buildings and roads you use topographical maps. These maps enable one to relate the
ancient settlement to the basic features of the natural landscape. There are two main
ways of collecting fossils and artifacts from a site: -
i) Collecting everything from the surface of site.
This approach of total collection is used in those areas where little archaeological
research has been done.
ii) Collecting diagnostic artifacts and fossil.
This is done when one is dealing with a well-known area and one just needs these
materials for further survey or study.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 27

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
4. SITE EXCAVATION
It‟s a major understanding in which archaeologists acquire data about the past. Unlike
surveys that recover data from the surface excavation recovers data from beneath the
ground.
Sites are chosen for excavation because it‟s hoped that they will provide the
information that will give some guidance about prehistoric past. But it should be
noted that all excavations are destructive and therefore every cautionary measure
must be considered before embarking on any form of excavation. In this regard, those
sites chosen for excavation are chosen only when they are threatened for destruction
and the choice of a site to excavate stem from the research problem. Research
problems may include reasons for evolution of a culture, social organization of a
community or environmental exploitation by prehistoric group e.t.c.
Excavation yields two kinds of information:
i) About human activities at a particular period in the past.
ii) Those activities from period to period.
Contemporary activities take place horizontally in space whereas changes in those
activities occur vertically through time. In horizontal dimension, archaeologists try to
demonstrate contemporary activities i.e. activities did occur at the same time by proving
through excavation that artifacts and other features are found in association in
undisturbed context. In the vertical profile showing a series of layers constitute a
sequence that has accumulated through time.
Practical considerations to take in mind before embarking on an excavation.
a) Permission to excavate
The permits must come from National Museums of Kenya, the owner of the land and the
office of the president. The National Museum of Kenya is mandated through legislation
(cap 218) to be the custodian of all Archaeological Heritages in Kenya.
b) Accessibility.
This determines whether you will walk; use a vehicle, a boat or an aircraft to reach a
particular site.
c) Finance.
This depends on the type of excavation one wants to carry out.
EXCAVATION STRATEGY
Is determined partly by nature of research problem and partly by the nature of practical
consideration. Excavation strategy must be flexible so that one can find materials
representing cultures that are not reflected in surface material. To do this, one must have
knowledge about the site before excavating. Two approaches are used to get such
knowledge.
i) Survey collection.
ii) Remote sensing.
Every excavation starts with a testing strategy, which consists of excavating small
squares in the deposits so as to obtain a preliminary understanding of the site stratigraphy
and variation in archaeology debris. There are two basic excavation methods or
strategies.
a) Horizontal method

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 28

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
Its objective is to uncover large areas on the ground in the search of the entire settlement
patterns. This is done on a relatively large scale and is designed to uncover household and
other activities that are normally discovered only by digging over an extensive area.
b) Vertical Method.
Its designed to uncover stratigraphic information or sequence of occupation layers on a
small scale. Vertical excavation is done when artifact samples are primary concern. Once
you have excavated the next step is recording

RECORDING
Once an artifact has been recovered, it must be given a number, which is entered in a
catalogue in the bag in which it is stored. Your day-to-day progress of excavation is
recorded in your site notebook, e.g. what you did that day, how many centimeters you
dug, which square and what was recovered.
Features and structures would not only be recorded in the site notebook but should be
accurately drawn and photographed.
Recording is usually followed by classification of materials found in a site. After
classification, what follows is laboratory analysis and preservation.
The final part constitutes report writing.

INTERPRETATION OF THE EVIDENCE

All the study of the past (prehistory) is indeed based on the very rigorous interpretation of
sources available (i.e. received from excavation), written or unwritten evidence and the
making of rigorous inferences and deductions from the same. What one could find out
therefore is naturally conditioned by the nature of his or her sources. It‟s a well-known
fact that each evidence has its poteritialities and possibilities, but also its limitations and
drawbacks. The evidence used by archaeologists –that of cultural material objects or
structures surviving from prehistoric time has its limitations. Obviously, its not possible
to find out from fragments of pottery or from the past holes of an otherwise vanished
wooden house, what language their makers spoke or what they thought about life after
death or how their social system was organized. However, burial practices do help to
shed some light on the inhabitants‟ beliefs of life after death.
This is basically based on the recovered materials found associated with some burials and
also on the positioning of the dead bodies. Prehistoric arts perhaps give the archaeologist
more reliable evidence related to such practices as magical religious beliefs than anything
else available.

ACTIVITY:

„Interpretation archaeological assemblage is subjective‟ Discuss.

PRESERVATION OF RECOVERED OBJECTS

This calls for extreme care. Objects of metals and sometimes pottery are often found in a
very poor state of preservation and their removal is attended to by a considerable risk of
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 29
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
damage. This risk can be lessened by allowing the object to dry thoroughly before
touching it at all. Direct source of heat or warmth must be considered, as this tends to
disintegrate artifacts, fossils and ecofacts. Where it is practicable a whole block of soil in
which the object is embedded can be removed and its excavation completed under safer
conditions at home or in the laboratory.
Human bones are preserved for professional examination by physical anthropology and
other related professionals who are normally able to determine from the bones, the age
and sex of the individuals, their height and the ethnic group to which they probably
belonged. This information is derived chiefly from the skull and the lower jaw, lip bones
and the pelvis, which are accordingly the most important bones to preserve ( Bass,1971).
Examination of skeletons recovered from archaeological excavation normally attempts to
reveal signs of diseases, wounds or fracture that might have been the cause of death.
Cremated bones are also preserved in this manner as carefully as the skeleton.

4.3 CLASSIFICATION AND TYPOLOGY IN ARCHAEOLOGY

There are constant classification and sorting of enormous quantities of data in our daily
life. Life is full of choice and classification, which are influenced by advertisement,
political exhortation and even education classification in every day life in learnt
behaviour and in archaeology. Classification is both learnt and defined by a large body of
explicit theory of archaeological classification.
In archaeology, classification is used as a means of ordering data, and the objectives of
classifications may change according to problems being investigated.
There are four objectives why archaeologists classify things.
a) In order to organize data into manageable units.
This involves separation of finds on the basis of the raw materials, which is used for
separating artifacts from food. This is a preliminary process and it allows for a more
detailed classification later.

b) To describe the types.

This is done by identifying the individual attributes of various artifacts and then grouping
them by common attributes into few types. These types are important in describing large
numbers of artifacts.
c) To identify relationship between the types.
This provides the basis for formulating hypothesis about the meaning of classification.
d) To study variability in the archaeological record.
NB: This classification is artificial and is set by the researchers so that it does not
necessarily mean that the people who made and used artifacts used this classification.

TYPOLOGY
Refers to classification of archaeological artifacts. Archaeologists classify their
collections into similar groups just like zoologists and refer to each group of artifact as a
type. For instance, if you want to know the relationship between the pottery type, you
may look at the shape and consider wide or narrow mouthed.
The value of typology is that it enables one to compare what has been found at two sites
or in different levels of the same sites. Classification is commonly done on the basis of
three kinds of attributes or characteristics: -
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 30
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
i) Surface or stylistic attributes e.g. decoration colour e.t.c
ii) Shape or form attribute e.g. narrow mouthed, wide mouthed e.t.c.
iii) Technological attribute e.g. raw materials used to make artifacts and the way
the artifact was made.
Artifacts, which are found to share similar attributes are, grouped together into types
hence typology. The groups of artifact types at a particular time and place are called
assemblages. Groups of assemblages define archaeological cultures.

4.4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

This lesson has traced the steps taken to investigate an archaeological site. This
begins with the site discovery, survey methods, excavation, data analysis and
preservation of excavated materials. It also entails classifying the materials recovered in
various categories or typologies.

4.5 REVISION EXERCISE.

Analyze the central features of investigating an archaeological

site.
Discuss classification and typology in the practice of
archaeology.

4.6 FURTHER READING

Branican, K. (1974) Reconstructing The Past. London: David and Charles.

Fagan, M.B. (1985) In the Beginning. An Introduction to Archaeology. Boston: Little
Brown and Company.
Jurmain, R.N $ William, A.T. (1987) Understanding Physical Anthropology and
Archaeology. 3rd edition. New York.
Sharer, R.J.$ Ashmore, W. (1979) Fundamentals of Archaeology. Munlo park,
California: The Benjamin publishing company Inc.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 31

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
LESSON V

DATING METHODS

5.0 INTRODUCTION
In lesson IV, we learned about how archaeologists acquire their data. In this lesson, I am
going to describe the major dating methods used when dating archaeological data. There
are mainly two dating methods, which are: - relative and chronometric.

5.1 OBJECTIVES

By the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

 State reasons why archaeologists date their materials.
 Give two examples of relative and two examples of chronometric dating
methods.
 Identify the strengths and weaknesses of each of the above dating methods.

5.2 CONTENT
DATING METHODS IN ARCHAEOLOGY
Dating is one of the key essentials in putting sites and fossils into a chronological
framework. Archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists and other scientists date their
evidence using either: -
a) Relative dating - “as old as”
b) Chronometric dating –“absolute”
WHY DATE?
In trying to trace the story about what happened in the long history of the world past, one
of the difficulties is to see just when different events took place. Where there are no
written records to give us dates, other methods have been devised to date the various
things that we know took place.
i) To interpret the archaeological materials by dating various morphological
aspects of human development and his materials. This is important because
there can be prove of theory about bio-cultural process unless time is
controlled.
ii) Thorough dating does help in eliminating any falsehood given to find
(biological or cultural). In this case, Piltdown (England) a man who had been
given a wrong date of 2.75m years has been redated to 320,000years only.
iii) Archaeological dating have also been used to authentic (prove) dates given by
historians. E.g. a case in point is the biblical date, which have been confirmed
or disputed by archaeological dating.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 32

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
iv) Dating has helped historians to understand that human development has never
been the same all over the world at the same time. From these dating we learn
that man first evolved in Africa, fire was first used in Kenya and possibly later
in China and that there has never been equal development in the world.
v) Dating itself helps archaeologists to reconstruct history from artifacts. In this,
periods are given to events. It is in dating that archaeologists accomplish the
delineation of synchronic segments. (Stone, bronze and iron) through relative
dating of archaeological materials. This classification is still valid today and
is used extensively by archaeologists and other social scientists.
RELATIVE DATING
Its divided into four subdivisions; R1,R2, R3,R4.
denotes primary sequence for example the age in relation of a find to the deposit it
was found in. E.g. Fossils like Australopithecus Africanus ( Southern apes) found
embedded in Breccia (limestone deposits) in South Africa.
R2 denotes a local sequence that has been dated e.g. „stone bowl culture‟, Kwale
pottery tradition among others.
R3 denotes the dating of objects compared to a worldwide situation e.g. the
morphology of man during ice age period (Pleistocene period)
R4 denotes the dating of fossils by looking at their morphology e.g. size of the brain,
jawbones e.t.c.
Examples of Relative Dating
a) Stratigraphy
Relative dating as used here shows something is older or younger than something else
but it does not tell us how old. If for example, a skull was found at the depth of 10
meters and another 20 meters at the same site, we usually assume the skull discovered
at 20meters is older. We may not know how old. It however, gives us some idea of
evolutionary changes in skull morphology especially if a number of skulls at different
levels were found and compared. Its focus is thus stratigraphic and is based upon the
law of superimposition, which states that a lower stratum is older than a higher one.
This is important because the earth crust is laid down by layers of sedimentary rocks,
which are useful in reconstructing the history of the earth and life on it. You can
therefore say event A took place before event B which in turn took place before event
C but you may not know how many years B.C or A.D any of them took place.

Disadvantage
 It does not account for earth‟s activities such as volcanic, river activities
and mountain buildings among others, which sometimes change the strata
or layers.
b) Fluorine Analysis.
It applies only to bones. It works on the assumption that bones in the earth are
exposed to seepage of the ground water usually containing fluorine. Fluorine in the
water combines with the bone calcium to form a compound called fluorapatite. The
fluorapatite in various bones in a site determines their being of the same age or not.
The longer the bones lie in the earth, the more they in- corporate fluorine during the
fossilization process. Therefore bones deposited at the same time in the same
location should contain the same amount of fluorapatite. The use of this technique by
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 33
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
professor Oakley of British Museum in the early 1950s exposed the Piltdown hoax by
demonstrating that the human skull was considerably older than the jaw (of a young
Urang Utang) found with it (Jurmain and William 1987).
Disadvantage
 Fluorine is only useful with bones found at the same location because the
amount of fluorine in ground water is based on the local river systems and
local conditions; it varies from place to place.
 Also some ground water may not contain any fluorine and for this reason,
comparing bones from different localities by fluorine analysis is
impossible.
 Like stratigraphy, Fluorine analysis does not give the age of the object we
are dealing with.
To determine the actual (absolute) number of years, a variety of chronometric
techniques based on the phenomena of radioactive decay have been developed by
scientists. Some of these include:
i) Uranium 238 (238 U)
ii) Potassium 40 (40 K or K/ Av)
iii)
Carbon 14 ( 14 C).
Other absolute dating methods include:
i) Archaeomagnetism or palaeomagnetism.
ii) Dendrochronology.

ACTIVITY:

List and explain chronometric dating methods used in dating

archaeological sites and materials.

Radio- active Decay Methods.

Chronometric techniques are based on the theory that certain radio active isotopes of
events are elements are unstable, disintegrate and form isotopic variation of another
element. Since the rate of disintegration follows a definite mathematical pattern the
radioactive material forms an accurate geological time clock. By measuring the
amount of disintegration in a particular sample, the number of years it took for the
amount to decay is then measured Chronometric techniques have been used for dating
the immerse age of the earth as well as materials less than 1000 years old.
URANIUM 238 ( 238 U )
It decays to form lead with a half-life of 4.5 billion years. For instance one half of the
original amount of Uranium 238 is lost in 4.5 billion years and through various
processes become lead Therefore if a piece of a rock is measured and half of Uranium
has been converted to lead the age of that piece of rock is 4.5 billion years. In another
AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 34
 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
4.5 billion years, the remaining Uranium 238 would be decaying and so on. The
isotope 238 U has proven useful in the dating the age of the formation of the earth.
POTASSIUM 40
It produces argon 40 when it decays. It has half-life of 1.3 billion years.
How it works.
Rocks that provide the best samples of potassium argon dating are those heated to
extremely high temperatures such as that generated by volcanic activity. When the
rock is in a molted state, argon 40, a gas is driven off. As the rock cools and
solidifies, potassium 40 decays into Argon 40 but now the gas is physically trapped in
the cooled rock. In order to obtain the date of the rock, its reheated and the escaping
gas measured. Potassium argon has been used for dating very old events such as the
of the earth as well as those less than 100,000 years old. This method has been used
extensively in dating materials in the 1-5 million years range especially in East
Africa.
Weaknesses.
 They deal with inorganic materials and therefore organic materials like
bones cannot be measured. This method therefore measures the rock
matrix in which the bones are found in.
CARBON 14 ( 14 C )
Cosmic radiation enters the earth atmosphere producing neutrons, which react with
nitrogen to produce a radioactive isotope of carbon, which is carbon 14. As the
carbon 14 is diffused around the earth with the earth‟s rotation, it mixes with carbon
12 and is absorbed by plants in their life processes (photosynthesis). It is then
transferred to the herbivorous animals that feed on plants and carnivorous that feed on
herbivorous. Thus Carbon 12 and Carbon 14 all found in living forms at a fixed
ratio.
Carbon 14 has a half-life of 5730 years. When the organism dies, it no longer absorbs
carbon 14, which then decays at a constant rate to nitrogen 14. It takes 5730 years for
half the amount of carbon 14 to become Nitrogen 14. E.g. if you collect charcoal
remains from a site and you find that the proportions of carbon 14 to that of nitrogen
14 shows only 25% of the original carbon 14 remaining, and we know that it takes
5730 years for the remaining to become nitrogen 14 then the sample must be about
11,460 years old. Half the remaining carbon 14 would become nitrogen 14 in the next
5730 years, leaving 12.5% of the original amount. This process continues until there
would be little carbon 14 left after 40,000 years when measuring becomes difficult.
Advantages.
 It gives the date of the objects we deal with (organic origin) and its usually
very accurate. This method has been used to date materials from less than
1000years to as much as 70, 000 years although the probability of error rises
rapidly after 40,000 years.

Weaknesses
 It gives smaller dates of up to 70,000 years.
 Relies only on organic materials.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 35

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
 Poor handling can lead to contamination leading to an error.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 36

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
Summary
None of these methods is precise. Each method is faced with many problems that must
carefully be considered during laboratory measurement and in the collection of materials
to be measured. Because all these methods are imprecise we give approximate date with a
plus (+) and minus (-) factor e.g. 150,000  150 years.

DENDROCHRONOLOGY.
This is a tree ring analysis. It is a dating technique as well as a method of providing
valuable information on past environments and climate. The method is based on the fact
that tress lay down one growth ring of cells annually. The method is only useful if the
individual rings can be counted. This is done backwards from timber of known dates,
marching the patterns of variation through a process known as cross dating.
In some cases, a sequence of cross-dated timber may be determined but without a link to
the modern day. This is known as Floating chronology. A special instance of the use of
dendrochronology is the checking of radio carbon dating. By joining rings of dead and
living timber, it has been possible for example to date trees extending well beyond 8000
years.

ACTIVITY:

Discuss dendrochronology dating method indicating its strength and

weaknesses.

5.3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The lesson has highlighted reasons for dating as well as the various
methods that have been used to give a chronological framework to
archaeological culture. Additionally, strengths and weaknesses of these
methods have been listed and explained.

REVISION EXERCISE

(i) Why should archaeological sites be dated?

(ii) With reference to chronometric and relative dating methods,
discuss how archaeological sites are dated.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 37

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
5.5 FURTHER READINGS

1. Brian, M.B (1983) Archaeology, A brief Introduction. 2nd edition. Boston: Little
Brown and company.
2. Goksu, N.Y, Oberfer, M. $ Regulla, D (1991) Scientific Dating Methods vol 1.
Kluwer Academic Publishers. Netherlands.
3. Jurmain, R.N $ William, A.T. (1987) Understanding Physical Anthropology and
Archaeology. 3rd edition. New York.
4. Michels,J.W (1973) Dating Methods in Archaeology. New York: Seminar Press.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 38

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
LESSON VI

THE INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH IN ARCHAEOLOGY

6.0 INTRODUCTION.
In the previous lesson, we looked at dating methods used in archaeology. This is
important because there cannot be prove of cultural and biological evolution unless time
is controlled.
In this lesson, I am going to describe the relationship between archaeology and other
disciplines. This is because archaeology relies on both pure and social science
methodology in order to acquire and interpret its data. Of importance however, is the
relationship between history and archaeology, which will be explained in more detail.

6.1 OBJECTIVES

By the end of the lesson you should be able to:

Explain the relationship between history and archaeology.
Explain the role of other disciplines archaeological in reconstruction

6.2 CONTENT
6.2.1 ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Archaeology is related to history because they both study the human past. The difference
between the two disciplines, however, lies in the methodology and techniques by which
the past is studied. While history relies on textual sources, oral tradition, linguistic
evidence and so on, archaeology deals with the physical remains of the past, which are
recovered by means of systematic archaeological excavations.
Second, historians study records or oral traditions of specific past events in order to
compare them, judge their validity, place them in a chronological sequence and interpret
them in light of preceding contemporary or subsequent events. The results of such
detailed studies are sometimes used to develop generalizations or descriptions of larger
historical trends and processes.
Archaeologists on the other hand, study the way of life of a broad cross-section of ancient
and extinct peoples, including a full range of human activities as reflected in the
recovered archaeological remains. Archaeologists differ from historians because they are
concerned with aspects of the past that cannot be directly supplemented by historical
sources. That is, history deals with a relativbely recent era of human development, a
period less than 5000 years, while archaeology covers the entire span of human existence
from its remote beginning to the present. This implies that archaeological data are not
historical data and consequently archaeology is not history (Hole and Heizer, 1973,
Fagan 1985).

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 39

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
6.2.2 INTERDISCPLINARY APPROACH IN ARCHAEOLOGY.
Archaeologists deal with multiplicity of data when reconstructing past human culture. An
archaeologist is for example concerned with the natural background to prehistoric human
existence. They must therefore study such things as the long-term changes of climate in
the Pleistocene period, which produced various glaciations and the warm periods, which
separated them. These climatic events had a profound effect on the vegetation of the vast
areas, on the animal populations and on the relative distribution of land and sea over the
whole earth. Such matters naturally dictate what areas were available for human
habitation, what were the sources of food and hence what kind of life was to be lived;
these things in turn are, of course, reflected in the distribution and nature of human
artifacts belonging to the period concerned (Roe, 1970). All these matters are bound up
very closely; and therefore, the archaeologists must concern themselves with them all.
In studying human past, they are merely one of a number of specialists all working
together, among the others will be geologists, physicists, botanists, physical
anthropologists, metallurgists, paleontologists, and many more. An archaeologist would
also rely on written sources to confirm certain things- historic archaeology.

Note:
Let us examine briefly how some of the above disciplines contribute to
archaeological reconstruction: -

i) Paleontology – it gives us evidence of fossilized and extinct animal bones.

These may include fish, turtle, crocodile, pigs, giraffes, hairs, birds, rodents,
antelopes, and even hominids. The presence of such provides an archaeologist
with voluminous information concerning the ecological conditions of early
hominids habitats. In addition, precise analysis of bones associated with
artifacts can sometimes tell us something about the diets and hunting
capability of early hominids. This has been done for some sites like Olduvai
George in Tanzania and Koobi Fora in Kenya. (Jurmain $ William 1987).
ii) Geology- Geoarchaeology deals with sediments and human activity using
methods and concepts of earth sciences. It combines natural geomorphic
processes as well as those caused by human agents. Human populations carry
organic and inorganic materials accidentally or deliberately to their homes.
Geoarcheaology is involved with archaeological investigations from the very
beginning and is concerned not only with the formation of sites and with the
changes they underwent during occupation, but also with what happened to
them after abandonment. In fact, it is not only interested in the process of site
formation but is the cornerstone to environmental reconstruction.
Geological sequences as represented by stratigraphic sequences help us to give
relative ages of beds where archaeological materials are found. Therefore, analysis of
physical conditions of a site may tell how they were formed, how long they may have
been occupied and perhaps what they contained if visual traces are gone.
iii) Botany- Analysis of plant vestiges in the form of pollen grains, carbonized
vegetable elements may give information on prehistoric diet, climate, land
use and chronology.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 40

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
iv) Physical anthropology- Examination of human skeletons recorded in
archaeological sites is the work of physical anthropologists. They normally
attempt to reveal signs of diseases, wounds or fractures that might have been
the cause of death, ethnicity (Caucasoid or African and so on), age, sex, and
height, among other aspects. In general, this examination provides the basis
for racial classification in prehistory, bear witness to burial patterns and thus
give evidence of culture and worldview of the people studied. (Bass 1971).
v) Metallurgists: They usually analyze technical aspects of manufacture and
identify the mineral or chemical composition of artifacts. Apart from smelting,
forging and chemical analysis they also help to determine the uses into which
metal artifacts were put, for example points, which were used as spears or
arrowheads, hammers and cutting implements .Of a particular importance is
the reconstruction of the economy of the site basing on metal implements
recovered.

ACTIVITY:

Can you state and explain other disciplines that can be used during

archaeological reconstruction

6.3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

We have explained the relationship that exists between archaeology and

other disciplines. In this case we have noted that, to reconstruct the culture of a site,
archaeologists depend on technical analyses from metallurgists, chemists,
physicists, geologists, botanists, zoologists, historians e.t.c. An archaeologist
therefore, need to have some basic knowledge in all the above and more so to work
in tandem with experts from all fields.

6.4 REVISION QUESTION

What is the relationship between history and archaeology?

Explain the role of other disciplines in archaeological reconstruction.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 41

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745
6.5 FURTHER READINGS

1. Bass, M.W (1971) Human Osteology: A Laboratory and Field Manual of the
Human Skeleton. Missouri: University Press.
2. Fagan, M.B. (1985) In the Beginning. An Introduction to Archaeology. Boston:
Little Brown and Company.
3. Hole, F. $ Heizer, R.F. (1973) An Introduction to Prehistoric Archaeology. New
York; Holt Rinehart $Winston, Inc.
4. Jurmain, R.N $ William, A.T. (1987) Understanding Physical Anthropology and
Archaeology. 3rd edition. New York.
5. Roe, D (1970) Prehistory: An Introduction. London: Macmillan.

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 42

 COURTESY OF AMOS PATIAT
0719274745

AHT 101: PRINCIPLES OF ARCHAEOLOGY 43