We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
This journal utilises an Online Peer Review Service (OPRS) for submissions. By clicking "Continue" you will be taken to our partner site
http://www.editorialmanager.com/advances/default.aspx.
Please be aware that your Cambridge account is not valid for this OPRS and registration is required. We strongly advise you to read all "Author instructions" in the "Journal information" area prior to submitting.
To save this undefined to your undefined account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your undefined account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge-org.demo.remotlog.com is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The Bolivar Archaeological Project exemplifies the possibilities of archaeology as service, incorporating descendant communities and local stakeholders into the fabric of the research design and planning for a state infrastructure project. This collaborative, multidisciplinary project attends to marginalized histories to offer a model for how publicly funded cultural resources management archaeology can serve multiple goals. The Bolivar Archaeological Project was conceived as a public archaeology project, with dual goals of being community driven and yielding scholarly contributions. In the shifting rural–urban landscape of Denton County, a Texas Department of Transportation road improvement project has supported archaeological investigations of two nineteenth-century sites—a blacksmith shop and hotel—associated with the historic Chisholm Trail. The blacksmith shop belonged to Tom Cook, an African American freedman, whose descendants reside nearby and became active participants in the investigations, including as collaborative authors in this article. The project illustrates the importance of representation and praxis to realize inclusive community engagement, with this article outlining the development of the project and ongoing research. Informed by Black feminist archaeologies, the project works at the intersections of local communities and state infrastructure while navigating landscapes of fraught histories and presents to forge an archaeology for the twenty-first century.
Archaeologists have struggled to combine remotely sensed datasets with preexisting information for landscape-level analyses. In the American Southeast, for example, analyses of lidar data using automated feature extraction algorithms have led to the identification of over 40 potential new pre-European-contact Native American shell ring deposits in Beaufort County, South Carolina. Such datasets are vital for understanding settlement distributions, yet a comprehensive assessment requires remotely sensed and previously surveyed archaeological data. Here, we use legacy data and airborne lidar-derived information to conduct a series of point pattern analyses using spatial models that we designed to assess the factors that best explain the location of shell rings. The results reveal that ring deposit locations are highly clustered and best explained through a combination of environmental conditions such as distance to water and elevation as well as social factors.
The purpose of this article is to discuss the challenges and opportunities for integrating archaeological information in landscape-scale conservation design while aligning archaeological practice with design and planning focused on cultural resources. Targeting this opportunity begins with statewide archaeological databases. Here, we compare the structure and content of Pennsylvania's and Florida's statewide archaeological databases, identifying opportunities for leveraging these data in landscape conservation design and planning. The research discussed here was part of a broader project, which was working through the lens of Landscape Conservation Cooperatives in order to develop processes for integrating broadly conceived cultural resources with natural resources as part of multistate or regional landscape conservation design efforts. Landscape Conservation Cooperatives offer new ways to think about archaeological information in practice and potentially new ways for archaeology to contribute to design and planning. Statewide archaeological databases, in particular, offer transformative potential for integrating cultural resource priorities in landscape conservation design. Targeted coordination across state boundaries along with the development of accessible derivative databases are two priorities to advance their utility.
Data preservation, reuse, and synthesis are important goals in contemporary archaeological research that have been addressed by the recent collaboration of the Eastern Archaic Faunal Working Group (EAFWG). We used the Digital Archaeological Record (tDAR) to preserve 60 significant legacy faunal databases from 23 Archaic period archaeological sites located in several contiguous subregions of the interior North American Eastern Woodlands. In order to resolve the problem of synthesizing non-standardized databases, we used the ontology and integration tools available in tDAR to explore comparability and combine datasets so that our research questions about aquatic resource use during the Archaic could be addressed at multiple scales. The challenges of making digital databases accessible for reuse, including the addition of metadata, and of linking disparate data in queryable datasets are significant but worth the effort. Our experience provides one example of how collaborative research may productively resolve problems in making legacy data accessible and usable for synthetic archaeological research.
Object-based, experiential learning/evidence-based inquiry engages young minds and models how research is conducted. It is clear that this kind of authentic experience stays with students long afterward. Our research investigated 74 fifth-grade public school students’ conceptions of evidence, of the provisional nature of archaeological and historical interpretations, and of the purposes for using archaeology to study the past. Three and four years later, we conducted follow-up interviews with 29 of the students to investigate what they remembered about their archaeological experience, including classroom instruction, excavation/labwork, and concepts related to archaeological processes and historical information. Our study shows that in-depth archaeological study has considerable sticking power. It also provides important insights into how students think about archaeology, history, and the past, and how they relate “things” to the past and to past cultures. In particular, it shows that the materiality of archaeology offers students opportunities to create multiple, evidence-based interpretations when they are taught to understand culture in material ways. Our study also offers concrete suggestions for anyone considering using objects to teach about the past: use an inquiry-based approach, take students’ prior knowledge into account, use metaphors carefully with younger children, and make the human-object connection explicit for all.