Postgraduate Diploma Program 2011 – 2012

Postgraduate Institute of Archaeology

Lecture 8

Ways of Knowing and Narrating the Past

Ranjith Bandara Dissanayake

mqrdúoHd;aul ióCIKfha úêl%u(Archaeological Survey Methods)

* foaYk jHqyh

1. .fõIKh: Ndú;h yd úêl%u

2. u;=msg .fõIK l%u

3. N+ fN!;sl .fõIK l%u

4. oqria: ixfõoS .fõIK l%u

bf.kqï M,

* mqrdúoHdfõ fCIa;% Ndú;dj

* mqrdúoHdfõ nyqúIhSh m%fõYh

* mqrdúoHd ióCIK i|yd fhdod .kakd úêl%u

What is Space ?

Cont..

Three modes of spatial thinking:

1. Perceived space (suppose)

2. Conceived space (imagine)

3. lived space

(“therdspace” as a place of transition between built and cognitive realities, a place in everyday life where conceptions of space are transformed.)

Cont..

Concept of Place;

..like a concept of space, is fundamental to understanding

Human society.

Place is both physical location of activity (the space where human

Action occur), and the historically contextualized construction and reconstruction of conceptions of that place.

Place is not a predetermined entity, rather place is porous,

Dynamic, and unstable yet resilient (flexible).

Place is constantly manipulated and negotiated by people in everyday life and simultaneously used by people in their negotiation of other aspect of life.

Space in Archaeology

•Archaeologists focused on trying to make sense of the artifacts and features they uncovered.

•By examining the characteristics of assemblages it became apparent that some shared certain traits and that these traits could be attributed to individual cultures.

•Reasoning that different cultures represented different ethnic groups, and that the characteristics of these groups could be understood through their material culture.

•These cultures influenced one another and that certain styles moved from one society to another through diffusion, migration or invasion.

• Spatial distribution of these “culture traits” was essential to understanding change.

•Classifying assemblages into groups with a discrete spatial extent; called “culture areas”.

Cont..

“…the study of past distribution of culture-traits in time and space, and the factors governing their distribution.”

(Clarke, D.L., 1977, Spatial Archaeology)

“After an artifacts has been exposed, its position must be recorded. This information is as significant as the artifact itself.”

( Robert Heizer, 1958

Spatial Patterns

•Notion of “site”.

- defined as a complex relational framework in which

social action and natural processes are related in a complex, dynamic and dialectical sense.

- An archaeological site is the place where social action “was” performed.

- Social action is never performed isolated or in an abstract vacuum.

- Social action is produced in physical space, and this is not a neutral container.

Cont…

- Archaeological site is not a random organized, nor it is result of chance alone.

-Changes in the topology of archaeological space determine changes in the statistical properties of the archaeological records.

Three modes of arch; context,

a) Locus

b) Site

c) Settlement

SETTLEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY AND SPATIAL ANALYSIS

In any inquiry about the social past, the first question to address is size or scale. Settlement archaeology includes an array of techniques and theories dedicated precisely to understanding these scalar questions.Archaeologists generally try to address spatial concerns first in the process of decoding past human behavior.

Investigating activities within a site

• the aim is to understand the nature of the activities that took place there, and of the social group that used it.

• One important distinction can be drawn between cave sites and open sites.

• Ethnoarchaeology – linking the ethnographic present with the archaeological past.

Investigating territories in mobile societies

• Off-site archaeology – how do people use the territory between sites? Sampling strategy to determine density of stone tools over large area. Space and density are the two critical factors examined.

SETTLEMENT PATTERNING

Possible site categories include (ascending scale):

•hamlet•dispersed village•nucleated village•local center•regional center

A site hierarchy in Mesoamerica. (a) Simplified hierarchy of site types. (b) Hypothetical site hierarchy on the ground, with the major regional center serving secondary centers spaced at regular intervals. These in turn serve larger villages and their networks of hamlets.

Central Place Theory (Walter Christaller, 1933).

• Basic tenet: In a uniform landscape, the spatial patterning of settlements would be perfectly regular, forming interconnecting hexagons.

Site Hierarchies

• Sites are organized in rank order by size.

• These are but two of many potential models for explaining the distribution of human settlements across given landscapes…

How do we bridge the gap between archaeological remains and the societies those remains represent?

The two most commonly proposed approaches are:

• middle range theory• analogy

(Somadeva 2005).

Central Place Theory

This is theory concerned with the functional importance of places

Central Place

• -is a settlement that provides goods & services. It can be small (a village) or large (primate city)

all settlements form a link in a hierarchy London 7m

Cambridge 108,000

Norwich 122,000

Peterborough 156,000

Why are there very few large settlements?

Settlement hierarchy

• Why are there very few large settlements?• Large settlements need a very large population

(threshold) to support all of their functions (services)

• Large settlements provide very high order functions (Great Ormond St, Houses of Parliament). Because these functions are so highly specialised there is not enough

demand to support more than a few of them

u;=m sg .fõIK úêl%u ^Surface survey&

fuys l%ufõo folls. tkï,

1 wl%uj;a ióCIK ^unsystematic survey&

fuh b;d ir, jQjls. .fõIlhdf.a wNsu;h mrsos fCIq;%fha ksoyfia weúÈñka, wod< o%jH tla/ia lrñka, u;=msg lsishï boslsrSula fõ kï tajd w;r we;s iïnJO;dj jd¾;d .; lrhs.

fuu l%uh,

mCImd;S yd fkdu. hjk iq̈ wra:ksrEmK ,nd fohs.

2 l%uj;a ióCIK ^systematic survey&

.fjsIKhg ,la lrk N+ñh ukdj md,kh l< yels mrsos is;shul Wml,ams; fldgqoe,a fhdod l%udkql+, wdldrhg wejso ^field walking& iuSCIKh flfra. N+ñfha lsisoq fldgila fj; wju wjOdkhla fyda Wmrsu wjOdkhla fhduq fkdflfra. ksheoslrKfha Wmrsu ksrjoH;dj ms<sn| ie<ls,su;a fõ.

l%uj;a fCIa;% iuSCIKhl idCIs:

1 flaJo%dmidrS úysoSu

2 úYd, m%foaYhla Wml,ams;

fldgqoe,lg we;=<;a fldg

iuSCIKh lsrSu

mqrdúoHd mYapd;a Wmdê wdh;kh u.ska 1999 - 2001 w;r ld,h ;=< isoql< lsrs|sTh my< ksuskfha mqrdK ckdjdi iuSCIKh

u;=m sg ióCIKfhys Ndú;dj

* mq¨,a ióCIK ^extensive survey& yd ;Sj% ióCIK ^intensive survey&

fuh l%u folla hgf;a jsia;r l< yel tkus

1 m%dfoaYSh ióCIK ^regional survey&

jsYd, m%foaYhla fyd l,dmhla f;dard f.k mq¨,a f,i;a ;Sj% f,i;a iuSCIKh lsrSuhs

2 ia:dkSh ióCIK ^site survey&ksYaÑ; l=vd wjldYhla f;dard f.k mq¨,a f,i;a ;Sj% f,i;a iuSCIKh lsrSuhs

The exploration was conducted within an area of 300km2. This area was divided into 1.6x1.6km squares. The extent of the reachable area in LKB is about 164km2. The un-reachable area (66km2) consists of mountains, a restricted wildlife sanctuary (Yāla) and several man-made reservoirs.

lsrs|sTh my< ksuskfha jra. lsf,dauSgr 300 l m%dfoaYSh .fjsIKh

N+ fN!;sl .fõIK úêl%u ^geo-physical survey&

* mqrdúoHdfõ nyqúIhd;aul m%fõYh

fuu l%ufhaoS jvd;a Wmfhda.S lr .kq ,nkafka N+úoHdj jsiska N+ wNHka;rh iuSCIKh i|yd oshqKq lrk ,o ;dCIKsl l%ufjsohkah.

fmdf<dj wNHka;rh fidhd ne,Su ^subsurface detection&

1 fmdf<dj jsoSu ^Probes/coring method&

f,day oKavla wdOdrfhka fyda fndarh ^Bores& Wmldr lr f.k fmdf<dj jso mia mrSCId lsrSu u.ska fmdf<dj wNHka;rh iuSCIKh lsrSu. fuys l%u folls. tkus,

w& w;a Ts.rh ^Hand Auger&

wd& hdka;%sl TS.rh ^Mechanical Auger&

fmdf<dj jso ne,Sfus jHdmD;sh - 2001 rusnd jsydr jHdmD;sh weUs,smsgsh ^Ramba Vihara Coring Project - 2001&

2 tkafvdiafldam iuSCIKh ^Endoscope&

* 1950 oYlfha jraOkh jQjls

* ldraf,d f,rsps ^Carlo Lerici& jsiska oshqKq lrk ,oaols

* fmdf<dj wNHka;rfha jk isoqre ;=<ska l=vd wOs;dCIKsl leurdjla hjd iuSCIKh lsrSu

* Bcsma;=fjs msruSv fuu l%uh hgf;a mrSCId fldg we;

* tgsg%ialka fidfydka N+us 3500 la muK mrSCId fldg tajd ish,a, ysia nj wjfndaO lr .kakd ,os

pqu sNl .fjsIK l%u ^Magnetic survey&

Ndjs;h - je<,S we;s ms<siaiQ ueá jHqyhka j<x fmdarKq hlv NdKav j<j,a yd w.,a wkdjrKh lrhs

uQ,Orauh - by; je<,S .sh wx. u.ska uek .; yels wkaofus N+ pqusNl fCIa;% jHdl+,;d ^distortions in the earth’s magnetic field& fmkakqus lrhs.

pqusNl fCIa;%j, fjkialus je<,S we;s o%jH wkqj fjkia fjs jsfYaIfhka hlvj, iusnJO;dj wkqj th r|d mj;S fuu ixfjsoS;dj i|yd b;d l=vd hlv m%udkhla ;snSu jqjo m%udKj;ah.

uegsj, we;s hlv Tlaihsv wxY=j, pqusNlFjh tu uegs fkdmq̂ iaik;dla wjsOsu;a f,i osYdkq.; fjs. tfy;a tu uegs fi,aishia wxYl 700 g fyda Bg jevsfhka r;a lsrSfusoS tajdfha hlv wxY= ia:sr f,i fmdf<dfjs pqusNl fCIa;% wkqj osYd .;jS ia:djr fjs.

pqusNl fCIq;%j, wksis m%;sl%shd ukskq ,nk, tu.ska je<,S we;s wx. wkdjrKh lr .ekSu i|yd Ndjs; lrkq ,nk l%ufjso ;=kls. tkus,

w& ue.fkdauSgrh ^magnetometer s&

wd& f.%vsfhdauSgrh ^gradiometer s&

we& f,day mrSCIlh ^metal detectors&

ue.afkd au Sgr

fmdf<dfjs we;s lrkq ,nk b;d iq̈ tfy;a ;shqKq pqusNl fCIa;% ;Sj%;d fjkialus .%yKh l< yel

1 fm%dafgdak ue.afkdauSgrh ^proton precession magnometer&

^jsoq,s o.rhla wka;ra.; lrk ,o c,h msrjQ fnda;,hlska hqla; fjs th l%shdldrS jkafka ixfjsolhla f,ih fuu ixfjsolh rsgl ijs fldg we;s w;r wf;a f.k hd yels wkaofus fmgsgshl jQ bf,lafg%daksl mrsm:hlg th flan,a u.ska iusnJO fldg we;&

2 *a,laiaf.ags ue.afkdauSgrh ^Fluxgate Magnometer&

3 vs*rkaI,a *a,laiaf.ags ue.afkdauSgrh ^Differential Fluxgate magnometer&

f.%vsfhdauSgr

1 *a,laiaf.ags f.%vsfhda uSgrh ^Fluxgate Gradiometer&

fuh wdf,dal m%Njhla wka;ra.; jQjls tu.ska fmdf<dfjs pqusNl fCIa;%j, ;Sj%;dfjs fjki wLKavj uek fohs

fuh iajhxl%s%h Pdhd jdra;dlrKhlg yd mrs.Klhlg iusnJO l< yel

f,day mrSCIl

fus u.ska pqusNlFjh ^magnetism& yd ikakdhl;dj^conductivity& hk .=Kdx. folu Ndjs; lrkq ,nhs th ishˆu f,day jra.j, jsoHq;a ikakdhl;dj yd hlv wvx.= f,dayj, by, pqusNl ku%;djg m%;spdr olajhs

1 mdxY= ikakdhl;d udklh ^soil conductivity meter&

2 iamkaok wd.uk udklh ^pulsed induction meter&

fuu WmlrK u.ska fmdf<dj fj;g iusfm%aIKh lrkq ,nk ;rx.j, fjkila we;s lrk mfia we;s ikakdhl;dj fyda ku%;dj u.ska fmdf<dj wNHka;rfha je<,S we;s o%jH ms<sn|j fkdj jHqy ms<sn|j wkdjrKh fjs

o qri a: ixfõo S ióCIK úêl%u ^remote sensing methods&

fmdf<dj jso ne,Sulska fyda leKSulska fyda f;drj ydksodhl fkdjk wdldrfha fmdf<dj wNHka;rh mrSCId lsrSfus l%u jkafka oqria: ixfjsoS iuSCIK l%uhkah

oqria: ixfjsoS WmlrK jsjsO Yla;Ska uqod yer mia jsksjso f.dia fmdf<dj hg je<,s we;s o%jH yd jHqyhka ms<n|j ms<sUsnqjla ,nd fokafka fmdf<dfjs we;s pqusNl fCIa;%j, ;Sj%;djg ixfjsoS fjusks

1 .=jka PdhdrEm ^Arial Photographs&

;sria .=jka PdhdrEm ^oblique Arial photographs&

isria .=jka PdhdrEm ^vertical Arial photographs&

frdaudkq n,fldgqjla .=jka PdhdrEmhlg osia jk whqre

2 pJo%sld PdhdrEm ^Landsat Satellite Images&

Spot 7 kus jQ m%xYhg wh;a Landsat

pJo%sldj jsiska 2002 jifraoS .kakd

,o lsrs|sTh my, ksuskh yd wjg

Spot 7 Landsat pJo%sldfjka .kakd ,o PdhdrEmhlska osia jk mshjs weig fkdfmfkk hd, m%foaYfha mqrdK l=Uqre hdhl m%;sksraudKhla

3 iSiausla yd Osjks ;rx. ^Seismic and Acoustic Methods&

^Osjks m%;srdj l%u - Echo Sounding&

fmdf<dj ;=<g Yla;sh hjd bka cks; Osjksh jdra;d.; lr N=.; wx. wkdjrKh lr .; yel

fuu.ska oqraj, Ynso u.ska lsisoq wjfYaIhla fkdue;s wNHka;rhlao wkqkdohla kxjk Ynsohla u.ska je<,S we;s j<j,a fyda w.,a ms<sn| i<l=Kqo y.jhs.

w& ia:djr ;rx. l%uh ^Standing wave technique&

wd& fidakdra l%u ^Sonar&

1 mdraYajSh ialEka fidakdra ^Side Scan Sonar&

4 .=jka jsoq,s ;rx. yd bf,lafg%daksl iamkaok ^Radio Waves and Electrical Impulses&

w& mdxY= Osjks fravdrh ^Soil-Sounding Radar&

wd& N+ fravdrh ^Geo-radar&

we& jsoHq;a m%;sfrdaOh ^Electriclal resistivity&