Re: Dendrochronology for medieval studies

William Black wrote: news:dv0nn9$535$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Eric Stevens" wrote

Which means, as I said, that there is no real division between
archaeology and history.

History is something people write.

Archaeology is primarily a 'craft skill'.

History is NOT a collection of facts, that is antiquarianism.

History, in the sense of a description of our past,
is an interpretation of written sources.
Archaeology, in the same sense, is an interpretation
of non-written sources.
Same aim, different techniques.


--
º°º°º°º < Peter Alaca > º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°º°


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: medieval
    ... It's the 'first mentioned in written sources' bit where the interpretation ... Roman centers were seemingly abandoned. ... and archaeology is still trying to cope with ... While british history sees ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: to Paul Burke Re: Grænlendinga þáttur
    ... >> findings, but also if the contradict your interpretation of that ... > say something existed, and the archaeology shows it didn't, so much ... Yes, and the written sources are seen as the real or only history, ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Charter schi.archaeology [0810]
    ... of relevant texts about what archaeology means. ... the text which followed had nothing to do with the charter of this ... is also a part of history, ... "History is an interpretation of the past based on ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Dendrochronology for medieval studies
    ... hence the classification pre-history, proto-history ... and history. ... For me archaeology is a way to write history, ...
    (soc.history.medieval)
  • Re: Is archaeology important?
    ... interpretation of archaeology can be a hugely subjective discipline. ... feel that archaeology's importance for many is not to assist in the ... Archaeology in the hands of somebody genuinely trying to explore the wonders ... Never mind but within archaeology field the history ...
    (sci.archaeology)