TY - CHAP
T1 - Comparative archaeology
T2 - A commitment to understanding variation
AU - Drennan, Robert D.
AU - Earle, Timothy
AU - Feinman, Gary M.
AU - Fletcher, Roland
AU - Kolb, Michael J.
AU - Peregrine, Peter
AU - Peterson, Christian E.
AU - Sinopoli, Carla
AU - Smith, Michael
AU - Smith, Monica L.
AU - Stark, Barbara L.
AU - Stark, Miriam T.
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © Cambridge University Press 2012.
PY - 2011/1/1
Y1 - 2011/1/1
N2 - As archaeologists, we seek to understand variation and change in past human societies. This goal necessitates a comparative approach, and comparisons justify the broad cross-cultural and diachronic scope of our work. Without comparisons we sink into the culture-bound theorizing against which anthropology and archaeology have long sought to broaden social science research. By undertaking comparisons that incorporate long-term social variability, archaeologists not only improve our understanding of the past, but also open the door to meaningful transdisciplinary research. Archaeologists have unique and comprehensive data sets whose analysis can contribute to dialogues surrounding contemporary issues and the myriad challenges of our era. In the past two decades, the pendulum seems to have swung away from comparative research in archaeology. Many archaeologists focus on detailed contextual descriptions of individual cases, and only a few have dedicated themselves to explicit comparative work. Yet in that same time span, fieldwork has expanded tremendously throughout the world, leading to an explosion of well-documented diachronic data on sites and regions. We now have substantial detail on the variation inherent in phenomena such as cultural assemblages, settlement patterns, and economic activity. New methods, from dating techniques to digital data processing, promote comparative analysis and greatly advance our understanding of human societies and change. The time is ripe for a renewed commitment to comparative research in archaeology.
AB - As archaeologists, we seek to understand variation and change in past human societies. This goal necessitates a comparative approach, and comparisons justify the broad cross-cultural and diachronic scope of our work. Without comparisons we sink into the culture-bound theorizing against which anthropology and archaeology have long sought to broaden social science research. By undertaking comparisons that incorporate long-term social variability, archaeologists not only improve our understanding of the past, but also open the door to meaningful transdisciplinary research. Archaeologists have unique and comprehensive data sets whose analysis can contribute to dialogues surrounding contemporary issues and the myriad challenges of our era. In the past two decades, the pendulum seems to have swung away from comparative research in archaeology. Many archaeologists focus on detailed contextual descriptions of individual cases, and only a few have dedicated themselves to explicit comparative work. Yet in that same time span, fieldwork has expanded tremendously throughout the world, leading to an explosion of well-documented diachronic data on sites and regions. We now have substantial detail on the variation inherent in phenomena such as cultural assemblages, settlement patterns, and economic activity. New methods, from dating techniques to digital data processing, promote comparative analysis and greatly advance our understanding of human societies and change. The time is ripe for a renewed commitment to comparative research in archaeology.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84897903454&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84897903454&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/CBO9781139022712.003
DO - 10.1017/CBO9781139022712.003
M3 - Chapter
SN - 9780521197915
SP - 1
EP - 3
BT - The Comparative Archaeology of Complex Societies
PB - Cambridge University Press
ER -