MENY
This is the study programme for 2019/2020. It is subject to change.


The course will introduce the students to different current theories and methods used in archaeological research, with a particular focus on the implementation of methods in archaeological research. Archaeological research is frequently interdisciplinary and consequently draws upon a wide range of methods, sometimes from other academic fields. Choice of methodological approaches is frequently bound up with topic and notably the theoretical framework, and the course addresses which methods are suitable in given theoretical frameworks. Particular focus will be given to theories and methods that deal with the material turn, the ontological turn, the science turn, and general epistemological considerations.

Learning outcome

Knowledge
After completing the course the students should:
  • Have an advanced understanding of the current theories used in archaeological research

Skills

After completing the course the students should:
  • Have an advanced understanding of implementation of appropriate methods considering theoretical approach
  • Evaluate which theories and methods that are applicable on different archaeological datasets
  • Be able to formulate new research questions that integrate a theoretical understanding with a methodological implementation
  • Be able to formulate a theoretical platform that integrates methods and datasets in an appropriate way and to an international standard
  • Be able to create an operational theoretical framework that encompasses appropriate methodology

General competence

After completing the course the students should:
  • Understand how research is situated within a research field in archaeology and the ramification that the different fields operate within.
  • Be able to identify the underpinnings and scientific traditions of theories and methods.
  • Be able to engage in an academic discourse on advanced theory and methodology within archaeology, both orally and in writing.

Contents

The course is designed to provide an overview over current theories and methods in archaeological research, and will give the students an advanced understanding of how theoretical frameworks and methodology are implemented in research projects.
Although the course will focus on current theory, the overall aim is to give them a practical understanding in how theory and methodology together play into a theoretical research design.
The underpinnings of the theoretical approach and methodologies will be examined to give the students knowledge of the traditions that theories and methods stem from, as well as their epistemological anchoring in either the humanities, natural science or social sciences.
The teachers will present research literature that cover the main topics and
The course covers topics such as:
  • The material turn
  • The ontological turn
  • Actor-network theory and châine operatoire
  • Personhood
  • The biographical perspective
  • Feminist critique
  • Sensory archaeology

Required prerequisite knowledge

The students must satisfy the admissions requirements of the PhD programme.

Exam

Weight Duration Marks Aid
Term paper1/1 Pass - Fail

Course teacher(s)

Course coordinator
Kristin Armstrong Oma

Method of work

A combination of lectures, articles presented by teachers and students and classroom discussions.

Coursework requirements
Students need to attend a one week on-campus study programme. Presence is mandatory (MP). Mandatory requirements: 75% presence. If students do not fulfil the MP requirement, students will have to pass an assignment given by the course coordinators in order to take the course exam.

Course assessment

Student evaluation will be conducted according to the regulations set forth by the Faculty of Social Sciences.

Literature

Harris, O. J. T. & Cipolla, C. N. 2017. Archaeological theory in the new Millennium. Introducing current perspectives. Routledge.
Practice theory and Chaîne opératoire
BOURDIEU, P. 1990. The Logic of Practice California, Stanford University Press. (BOK)
BLEED, P. 2001. Trees or Chains, Links or Branches: Conceptual Alternatives for Consideration of Stone Tool Production and other Sequential Activites. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 8, 101-127.
DOBRES, M.-A. 2010. The phenomenal promise of Chaîne Opératoire. Mindfully engaged bodies and the manufacture of personhood in a regional perspective. In: BARNDON, R., ENGEVIK, A. & ØYE, I. (eds.) The Archaeology of Regional Technologies. Case Studies from the Palaeolithic to the Age of the Vikings. Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press.
EDMONDS, M. 1990. Description, understanding and the chaîne opératoire. Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 9, 55-70.
NYLAND, A. J. 2017. Quarrying in the Stone Age and Bronze Age in southern Norway studied as a socially situated phenomenon. Bulgarian E-Journal of Archaeology, 7, 133-154.
SCHLANGER, N. 1994. Mindful technology: unleashing the chaîne opératoire for an archaeology of mind. In: RENFREW, C. & ZUBROW, E. B. W. (eds.) The Ancient Mind. Elements of cognitive archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
SORESSI, M. & GENESTE, J.-M. 2011. The history and efficacy of the chaîne opératoire approach to lithic analysis: Studying techniques to reveal past societies in an evolutionary perspective. Paleoanthropology, 334-350.
SØRENSEN, M. 2006. The Chaîne Opératoire Applied to Arctic Archaeology. In: GRØNNOW, B. & ARNEBERG, J. (eds.) Dynamics of Northern Societies, Proceedings of the SILA/NABO Conference on Arctic and North Atlantic Archaeology, Copenhagen, May 10th-14th, 2004. Kjøbenhavn: National Museum of Denmark.
LARSSON, Å. M. 2009. Breaking and making bodies and pots. Material and Ritual Practices in Sweden in the Third Millennium BC, Uppsala, Department of Archaeology and Ancient History. (se Ch.6)
Sensory archaeology
BILLE, M. & SØRENSEN, T. F. 2007. An Anthropology of luminosity. The Agency of Light. Journal of Material Culture, 12, 263–284.
BJERCK, H. B. 2012. On the outer fringe of the human world: Phenomenological perspectives on anthropomorphic cave paintings in Norway. In: BERGSVIK, K. A. & SKEATES, R. (eds.) Caves in context. The cultural significance of caves and rock shelters in Europe. Oxford: Oxbow books.
BOIVIN, N., BRUMM, A., LEWIS, H., ROBINSON, D. & KORISETTAR, R. 2013. Sensual, material, and technological understanding: exploring prehistoric soundscapes in south India. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 13, 267-294.
DAY, J. 2013. Introduction: Making Senses of the Past. In: DAY, J. (ed.) Making Senses of the Past: Toward a Sensory Archaeology. Illinois: Southern Illinois University press.
EDGEWORTH, M. 2012. Follow the Cut, Follow the Rythm, Follow the Material. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 45, 76-114. Diskusjonsartikkel
FAHLANDER, F. & KJELLSTRÖM, A. (eds.) 2010. Making Sense of Things: Archaeologies of Sensory Perception. Stockholm: TMG. (intro)
HAMILAKIS, Y. 2016. Sensorial Assemblages: Affect, Memory and Temporality in Assemblage Thinking. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 27, 169-182. (intro + selvvalgte artikler)
LARSSON, Å. M. 2009. Breaking and making bodies and pots. Material and Ritual Practices in Sweden in the Third Millennium BC, Uppsala, Department of Archaeology and Ancient History. (se Ch.6)
MARILA, M. 2017. Vagueness and Archaeological Interpretation: A Sensuous Approach to Archaeological Knowledge Formation through Finds Analysis. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 50, 66-88.
PETURSDOTTIR, T. 2016. For love of ruins. In: BILLE, M. & SØRENSEN, L. (eds.) Elements of Architecture. Assembling archaeology, atmosphare and the performance of building space London: Routledge.
Biography
Harris, O. J. T. & Cipolla, C. N. 2017. Secret lives of things. Object agency and biography. In Archaeological theory in the new Millennium. Introducing current perspectives, Chapter 5. Routledge.
Joy, J. 2009. Reinvigorating object biography. Reproducing the drama of object lives. World Archaeology, 41 (4), 540–556.
Imaginative narrative:
Tringham, R. 1994. Engendered places in prehistory. Gender, Place and Culture, 1 (2), 169–203.
Anthropology, Art and Aesthetics:
Coote, J. 2006. “Marvels of everyday vision”. The anthropology of aesthetics and the cattle-keeping Nilotes. In H. Morphy and M. Perkins (eds). The anthropology of art. A reader, 281–301. Oxford.
Gell, A. 1992. The technology of enchantment and the enchantment of technology. In J. Coote & A. Shelton (eds.), Anthropology, Art and Aesthetics. 40–63. Oxford.
Morphy, H. 2006. From dull to brilliant. The aesthetics of spiritual power among the Yolngu. In H. Morphy and M. Perkins (eds). The anthropology of art. A reader, 302–325. Oxford.
See also articles on Sensory archaeology:
Hamilakis, Y. 2017. Sensorial Assemblages: Affect, Memory and Temporality in Assemblage Thinking. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 27 (1), 169–182.
Harris, O. J. T. & Sørensen, T. F. 2010. Rethinking emotion and material culture. Archaeological Dialogues 17 (2), 145–163.
Entangled Identities. Migration period Animal Art, Textile Equipment – and Sheep
Harris, O. J. T. & Cipolla, C. N. 2017. Things make people? Considering materiality, phenomenology, experience and entanglement. In Archaeological theory in the new Millennium. Introducing current perspectives, Chapter 6. Routledge.
Harris, O. J. T. & Cipolla, C. N. 2017. Multi-species archaeology. People, plants and animals. In Archaeological theory in the new Millennium. Introducing current perspectives, Chapter 9. Routledge.
Oma, K. A. 2018. The Sheep People. The Ontology of Making Lives Building Homes and Forging Herds in Early Bronze Age Norway, chapter 1 – 3. Equinox.
Schlanger, N. 1994. Mindful technology. Unleashing the châine opératoire for an archaeology of mind.
Background on Animal Art:
Kristoffersen, S. 2010. Half beast – half man: hybrid figures in animal art. World Archaeology, 42 (2), 261–272.
Kristoffersen, E. S. 2017. Defining and transcending boundaries in Style I Animal Art. In S. Semple, C. Orsini & S. Mui (eds.) Life on the edge. Social, political and religious frontiers in Early Medieval Europe. 365–372. Neue Studien zur Sachsenforschung 6. Braunschwigisches Landesmuseum, Braunschweig.
The ontological turn
Alberti, B., S. Fowles, M. Holbraad, Y. Marshall and C. Whitmore
2011 "Worlds otherwise". Archaeology, anthropology and ontological difference. Current Anthropology 52(6):896-912.
Harris, Oliver J. T. & Robb, John
2012 Multiple Ontologies and the Problem of the Body in History. American Anthropologist, December 2012, Vol.114(4), pp.668-679
Kohn, E.
2007 How dogs dream: Amazonian natures and the politics of transspecies engagement. American Ethnologist 34(1):3-24.
Oma, K. A.
In press 2019 On the Fringe: Sheepdogs and their Status of Being within Bronze Age Ontologies. In Peter Whitridge and Erica Hill, Reimagining animals in the (global) north, Routledge
Viveiros de Castro, E.
1998 Cosmological deixies and Amerindian perspectivism. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 4(3):469-488.
Posthumanism, multispecies agency and feminist critique
Fredengren, Christina
2013 Posthumanism, the transcorporeal and biomolecular archaeology. Current Swedish Archaeology 21:53–71.
2008 Ingold, Tim
When ANT meets SPIDER: Social theory for arthropods In C. Knappett, L. Malafouris (eds.), Material Agency: 209-215.
Kirksey, S. E., and S. Helmreich
2010 The emergence of multispecies ethnography. Cultural Anthropology 25(4):545-576.
Oma, K. A.
2013 Human-animal meeting points: Use of Space in the Household Arena in Past Societies. Society & Animals 21(2):163-178.
Tsing, Anna
2012 Unruly Edges: Mushrooms as Companion Species. For Donna Haraway. Environment and Society 1:141–154.


This is the study programme for 2019/2020. It is subject to change.

Sist oppdatert: 24.08.2019