Clarke in Mediterranean archaeology.

Clarke in Mediterranean archaeology. When ANTIQUITY published the historical article by Clarke, I was a20-year-old student, deeply engaged in field activities andsubstantially torn away from the 'theoretical' debate.My archaeological loss of innocence happened only in the early 1980s,when I discovered (thanks to people like Maurizio Tosi and Anna MariaBietti Sestieri) the enormous explanatory potential of processualtheories.It would be absurd to label the whole of Italian archaeology as'atheoretical'; as a matter of fact, a powerful theoreticalmachine, the Marxist theory, had operated from the late 1960s, thanks tothe group of Dialoghi di Archeologia. The problem was in the idealistic i��de��al��is��tic?adj.Of, relating to, or having the nature of an idealist or idealism.ide��al��is roots of our (academic) culture, characterized by a programmatic pro��gram��mat��ic?adj.1. Of, relating to, or having a program.2. Following an overall plan or schedule: a step-by-step, programmatic approach to problem solving.3. divorcebetween humanistic and scientific studies and from a substantial lack ofinterest for the anthropological theories.For a young Marxist-committed scholar of prehistory prehistory,period of human evolution before writing was invented and records kept. The term was coined by Daniel Wilson in 1851. It is followed by protohistory, the period for which we have some records but must still rely largely on archaeological evidence to , as I was, NewArchaeology brought fresh air in this environment, allowing the openingof previously unthinkable perspectives in the explanation of animpressively growing corpus of archaeological data.The 1980s saw the formation of an 'Italian' group ofscholars that in many congresses and seminars in the Anglo-Saxoncountries or in Italy could profitably exchange their points of viewwith the protagonists of processual (and, in some cases,post-processual) archaeology (Cuomo di Caprio 1986; Guidi 1987; 1996a).This 'burst' of theoretical interest ended in the late'80s (but not our participation in conferences, as demonstrated bythe last Bournemouth TAG, with two 'Italian' sessions!). Inthe meantime Adv. 1. in the meantime - during the intervening time; "meanwhile I will not think about the problem"; "meantime he was attentive to his other interests"; "in the meantime the police were notified"meantime, meanwhile , the debate on processual theories spread also in Classicaland Medieval environments, with the important consequence of ageneralized loss of innocence of our archaeology; in the same years, aparallel debate developed in Spain, building the premises for anever-improving network of exchanges, projects and experiences inMediterranean archaeology.Naive as they might seem, our efforts of the '80s were anattempt to break the overwhelming climate of relativism relativismAny view that maintains that the truth or falsity of statements of a certain class depends on the person making the statement or upon his circumstances or society. Historically the most prevalent form of relativism has been See also ethical relativism. and intellectualcompliance that dominated Italian archaeology. As a matter of fact, theuse of processual categories and of the anthropological theory and acomplete integration of these 'keys' of interpretation of thearchaeological data with our tradition of studies are the best ways tograpple with to enter into contest with, resolutely and courageously.See also: Grapple problems like the study of early state formation in IronAge Italy, a classical 'taboo' of our archaeology, only inrecent years finally acquiring the dignity of an historical question(see, also for the bibliography, Carandini 1997).Coming back to Clarke's article, it must be recognized that, atthe time of its publication, there was no reaction on the Italian scene(probably also because very few persons knew it!). Apart from anarticle/review of Analytical archaeology by the Polish archaeologistTabaczynsky - well-acquainted with Italian archaeology and introduced,on that occasion, by the Italian scholar Gabriella Maetzke published in1976 in Archeologia Medievale (Tabaczynsky 1976), the 'loss ofinnocence' is quoted (not by chance, in the brief season of Italian'processual' archaeology) in some 'theoretical'articles of the late 1970s and '80s (e.g. Barich 1977-82; 1982;Maetzke 1981; Cuomo di Caprio 1986; De Guio 1988-89; 1989), often as asymbol of the need for a renewal of archaeology in our own country.It is more interesting to investigate the general impact ofClarke's works in Italy and in Spain. Examining the bibliography wediscover that Beaker beaker/beak��er/ (bek��er) a glass cup, usually with a lip for pouring, used by chemists and pharmacists. beakera round laboratory vessel of various materials, usually with parallel sides and often with a pouring spout. pottery of Great Britain and Ireland Great Britain and Ireland are the two largest islands in the British Isles. A former state, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, was composed of the political union of the two. was readilyreviewed in Italy (Cazzella 1971). The same scholar, Alberto Cazzella,critically quotes Analytical archaeology in an article of the early1970s (Cazzella 1972); this notwithstanding, the book was never reviewedby any Italian archaeologist, and a translation to appear in a new'theoretical' series was announced only this year, while inSpain the book was already translated in the '80s (Clarke 1984). Itshould be remembered, as a demonstration of the great popularity of thisbook, that already in 1969 a collective work of Turkish scholars waspublished, with the significant title Analitik arkeologi (Dincol &Kantman 1969).The field in which Clarke's work was more influential in bothcountries is settlement archaeology. In Italy, the congress about'Economy and territorial organization in the prehistoricsocieties', held in Rome in 1982, in which spatial analysis (Data West Research Agency definition: see GIS glossary.) Analytical techniques to determine the spatial distribution of a variable, the relationship between the spatial distribution of variables, and the association of the variables of an area. techniques (Thiessen polygons, site catchment catch��ment?n.1. A catching or collecting of water, especially rainwater.2. a. A structure, such as a basin or reservoir, used for collecting or draining water.b. analysis, etc.) wereemployed for the explanation of Italian archaeological data. Economia eorganizzazione (1982) was also the first occasion for a'public' presentation of Spatial Archaeology (Cardarelli1982); in the following years these themes were recurrently held, incongresses, books and articles, by many scholars (for the bibliographysee Guidi 1996b).In Spain things went still further; as a matter of fact, ArqueologiaEspacial was the name chosen by Francisco Burillo for the Nationalcongress on 'Distribution and Mutual Relationships ofSettlements' held in Teruel in 1984 that was the first trueoccasion of meeting for many young researchers engaged in Prehistoric,Classical and Medieval Archaeology The study of humankind through its material culture, specialising in the period of the European Middle Ages. At its broadest, the period stretches from the 5th to the 16th century CE and refers to post-Roman but pre modern remains. (Arqueologia Espacial 1, 1984-85).Moreover, the next meeting, held in the same place in 1986, wassignificantly named 'Colloquium on the Microspace'(Arqueologia Espacial 2, 1986-87).The recognition of Clarke's influence on Italian and Spanisharchaeology indicates clearly that in these countries, as well as inEastern Europe Eastern EuropeThe countries of eastern Europe, especially those that were allied with the USSR in the Warsaw Pact, which was established in 1955 and dissolved in 1991. , he was, for many years, the most popular among the NewArchaeologists.Yet in the early '70s, Binford harshly criticized Clarke, who inAnalytical archaeology 'had adopted the statistical procedures ofSokal and Sheath sheath(sheth) a tubular case or envelope.arachnoid sheath? the continuation of the arachnoidea mater around the optic nerve, forming part of its internal sheath. . . ., the sophisticated locational approaches of PeterHaggett . . ., and the metalanguage of system theory, but all of this .. . integrated into a traditionalist paradigm of culture' (Binford1972: 330; italics are mine). This is, effectively, the bestinterpretation of the critical (if also often negative) attention paidto Clarke's work in a traditionalist academic environment; hismajor book, as a matter of fact, is a complex synthesis between the newtheories and the 'mainstream' cultural approach of Europeanprehistory.For the same reasons, a 'continental' tradition ofsettlement archaeology, whose roots go back to the surveys and theextensive excavations of the period between the two World Wars, couldnot remain indifferent to Clarke's speculation on the 'levelsof resolution' of spatial archaeology.This never-ending critical 'dialogue' between Clarke andmany of us (also on the Classical and Medieval side) is, overall, a gooddemonstration of the growing need for an integration between theanthropological and the historical explanations, after the 'GreatDivide' of the last decades.What is the legacy of Clarke's 'loss of innocence'?It is difficult for the reader of the 1990s to avoid the impressionthat it fully reflects the climate of optimism and trust in science thatdominated the '60s and the early '70s; this notwithstanding,many observations seem impressively up-to-date.One example, among others, is the prophetical (and often unheeded)call for the building of predepositional, depositional andpostdepositional theories; the present climate of discard of processualitems is effectively justified from the ascertainment of the distancebetween the refined theories and a still absolutely poorly unknownarchaeological record The archaeological record is a term used in archaeology to denote all archaeological evidence, including the physical remains of past human activities which archaeologists seek out and record in an attempt to analyze and reconstruct the past. . Again, in this field some Spanish and Italianscholars worked very hard, reaching a good and refined theoreticallevel. Not by chance, the fourth Teruel meeting was dedicated to thepostdepositional transformations (Arqueologia Espacial 4, 1993-96); onthe other side, Giovanni Leonardi, Claudio Balista and Armando De Guiocreated a 'school' devoted to the improvement of thetechniques of excavation and survey, well aware of these complexproblems (see e.g. Leonardi 1992; De Guio 1992).It is impossible to predict the future, but is highly probable thatthe problems connected with formation processes and the compositionalcharacteristics of archaeological deposits will be a major item ofdebate in the years to come. This will be, probably, the real'interpretive' archaeology, a powerful tool to reshape ourtheories.Using Clarke's metaphor, it is right to acknowledge how the lossof innocence can be only a first step in individual development: thegoal of 3rd-millennium archaeology will be the acquisition of fullmaturity!ReferencesArqueologia Espacial 1. 1984-85. Coloquio sobre distribucion yrelaciones entre los asentamientos (vols. 1-6). Teruel: Cometa S.A.Arqueologia Espacial 2. 1986-87. Coloquio sobre el microespacio(vols. 7-11). Teruel: Cometa S.A.Arqueologia Espacial 4. 1993-96. Procesos postdeposicionales (vols.15-17). Teruel: Corneta S.A.BARICH, B. 1977-82. Il problema della teoria nell'archeologiapreistorica e nelle scienze umane, Origini 11: 7-44.1981. Prospettive in archeologia preistorica dope la crisi delparadigma tradizionale, Antropologia contemporanea 5: 127-32.BINFORD, L.R. 1972. An archaeological perspective. New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of (NY):Seminar Press.CARANDINI, A. 1997. La nascita di Roma. Dei, lari la��ri?n. pl. lariSee Table at currency.[Georgian.]Noun 1. lari - the basic unit of money in GeorgiaGeorgian monetary unit - monetary unit in Georgia , eroi e uominiall'alba di una civilta. Torino: Einaudi.CARDARELLI, A. 1982. Gli studi sul territorio nell'archeologiabritannica: alcuni recenti indirizzi di ricerca, in Economia eOrganizzazione: 11-18.CAZZELLA, A. 1971. Review of Beaker pottery of Great Britain andIreland, Origini 5: 329-35.1972. Considerazioni su alcuni aspetti eneolitici dell'Italiameridionale e della Sicilia, Origini 6: 171-299.CLARKE, D.L. 1984. Arqueologia analitica. Barcelona: Bellaterra S.A.CUOMO DI CAPRIO, N. 1986. Onde di propagazione della New Archaeologyin Italia, Rivista di Archeologia 10: 59-71.DE GUIO, A. 1988-89. Analisi funzionale dei 'paesaggi dipotere', Origini 14: 447-78.1989. Costruzione di modelli e archeologia postprocessuale: unpercorse critico, in Istituto Italiano di Preistorie e Protohistorie(ed.), Dottrina e metodologia della ricerca preistorica: 301-14.Ferrara: S.A.T.E.1992. 'Archeologia della complessita' e calcolatori: unpercorso di sopravvivenza fra teorie del caos, 'attrattoristrani', frattali e frattaglie del postmoderno, in M. Bernardi(ed.), Archeologia del paesaggio: 305-89. Firenze: All'Insegna delGiglie.DINSOL, A.M. & S. KANTMAN. 1969. Analitik arkeologi. Istanbul.Economia e organizzazione del territorio nelle societa preistoriche.1982. Congress proceedings, Dialoghi di Archeologia n.s. 4.GUIDI A., 1987. The development of prehistoric archaeology History is the study of the past using written records. Archaeology can also be used to study the past alongside history. Prehistoric archaeology is the study of the past before historical records began. in italy,Acta Archaeologica 58: 237-47.1996a. The Italian pluriverse: different approaches to prehistoricarchaeology, The European Archaeologist 5 (August): 5-8.1996b. Processual and post-processual trends in Italian archaeology,in A. Bietti, A. Cazzella, I. Johnson & A. Voorrips (ed.),Theoretical and methodological problems (Colloquium col��lo��qui��um?n. pl. col��lo��qui��ums or col��lo��qui��a1. An informal meeting for the exchange of views.2. An academic seminar on a broad field of study, usually led by a different lecturer at each meeting. 1, 13thInternational Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences):29-36. Forli: A.B.A.C.O.LEONARDI, G. (ed.). 1992. Processi formativi della stratificazionearcheologica. Padua: Imprimitur.MAETZKE, G. 1981. Metodi e problemi dell'analisi delle fontiarcheologiche, Archeologia medievale 8: 35-46.TABACZYNSKY, S. 1976. Cultura e culture nella problematica dellaricerca archeologica, Archeologia medievale 3: 25-52.