This article traces the evolution of the practice and regulation of preventive archaeology from the early 1980s to the present day. It attempts to highlight its scientific contribution, through its ...results and methods, and reviews the legislative and regulatory changes that have taken place since the law of 17th January 2001, which gave it its legal framework. While the trajectory and development were very positive until the early 2000s, the competitive nature of the excavations in 2003, which was not reviewed by the 2013 White Paper on Archaeology, creates a risk of dispersion and loss of archaeological data. To overcome this difficulty and make objective use of the scientific data accumulated over the past forty years, it is essential to strengthen the modalities of collaboration at the national level. The implementation of shared tools (Open data) giving access to archaeological information that is currently scattered among operators and a strong inter-institutional collaborative policy should contribute to achieving this objective.
The preventive archaeology system in Luxembourg was developed during the 1990s. Archaeological heritage is now managed by the National Archaeological Research Centre/Centre national de recherche ...archéologique (CNRA), founded in 2011, although there is still no legal framework within which archaeology can be protected. A draft law implementing the principles of the Valletta Convention will provide the structure for the CNRA to assess construction projects and require archaeological investigations. This paper outlines the development of the system, notes the challenges and highlights opportunities to raise public awareness, which are keys to engage the public in local decision making, through the communes.
Since the Renaissance, the way archaeological remains have been represented has been based first of all on the draftsman’s talents, later enriched according to scientific and technical progress. This ...is still true today. The way data is captured and the way digital images are produced have an equally visible impact on archaeological images. But our investigative tools can today render visible what was not visible before, and the representation of newness requires creativity. Our software can offer graphical renderings which are completely new or were difficult to produce in the past, so we try them out. But this tremendous potential for renewal and evolution that digital imaging offers must provide appropriate graphic renderings. Is this a question of a lack of knowledge about the rules of representation and the techniques used, or is it a beneficial progress for science? Some elements hitherto inseparable from scientific representation are disappearing today because they are now considered useless or redundant. But can we imagine the consequences of these losses in the long term? Through the experience of the work carried by the INRAP, France’s national institution for preventive archaeologicy, we will try here to identify the emerging uses of digital imaging, and the way the representations of archaeological data are changing.
Los arqueólogos profesionales son aquellas personas que viven del ejercicio liberal de la Arqueología. Resulta preocupante que se haya convertido en un tópico señalar que la Arqueología profesional ...está en crisis. Las causas podrían resumirse en tres. En primer lugar, sus practicantes desempeñan un difícil papel intermedio entre las administraciones culturales, por un lado, y los promotores, por otro. De la primera dependen para desarrollar las actividades que son encargadas por los segundos, quienes lo hacen no por convicción sino para satisfacer las obligaciones impuestas normativamente. Una segunda causa de insatisfacción procede de la dejación, por parte de las administraciones culturales, de algunas de las responsabilidades sobre la Arqueología preventiva en manos de los promotores y propietarios de suelo, como aplicación del neoliberalismo más descarnado. Por último, la relación con la administración cultural normalmente resulta fluida, pero ello no evita los tiempos, en muchas ocasiones inexplicables, que la burocratización ha impuesto para culminar trámites, como el de las autorizaciones de actividades arqueológicas. En este trabajo identificamos estas tres circunstancias como el problema de la Arqueología profesional y la causa del malestar de quienes la practican, pero también proponemos una solución para resolver esos desajustes que, lejos de ser coyunturales, se han vuelto sistémicos en la gestión de la Arqueología preventiva y, por tanto, imposibles de atajar si no se cambia de modelo.
In the relatively abundant bibliography on archaeological theory and epistemology the impact of archaeological practice on archaeological epistemology has remained somehow less explored despite the ...fact that in the last three decades archaeology has undergone radical changes in practice. We would like to point to three interconnected trends: an exceptional increase in the amount of archaeological fieldwork, the fact that probably more than 90% of all field projects are in the domain of heritage protection, and that archaeology has become a data-driven discipline, producing new circumstances which challenge the traditional epistemological views and require social epistemological rethinking. This paper aims to explore some social epistemological aspects in current archaeological practice in Slovenia where two rather distinctive groups of archaeological researchers emerged, academic archaeologists and field professionals. The distinction between the two groups has grown since the late 1990s with the introduction of preventive archaeology, changes in legislation in heritage protection, and the development of the commercial sector in archaeology. These changes opened a series of questions on epistemic effects in new circumstances, e.g. how these two groups contribute to archaeological knowledge, how their modes of obtaining knowledge are structured and organized, what social factors condition these modes, and, least but not last, the question of forms of epistemic asymmetries.
This article proposes to revisit the origins and objectives of the creation at the start of the 1980s of the journal Les Nouvelles de l’archéologie, a journal that rapidly became an inevitable ...crossroads for debates relating to archaeology. Besides its importance for the circulation and diffusion of professional information, the journal has been very much interested in methodological and theoretical issues. Taking up again a 1980 article, followed by several others, we shed light on the situation of theoretical debates on the discipline in France, their development in relation to the New Archaeology then the post-processual archaeology of anglophone countries. Lastly we recall the considerable place taken recently by preventive archaeology, its construction, its defence and its lack of means for study and publication, at a time when research stemming from archaeology (environmental problems, collapse, inequalities, violence, etc.) is increasingly involved in today's most intensive societal debates.
La vie de chantier Ingrid Sénépart; Luc Jallot
Nouvelles de l'archéologie,
07/2019, Letnik:
155
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
The authors of the article wonder about the evolution of living conditions on archaeological sites between 1980 and 2010, in parallel with the professionalization of field archaeologists in France. ...The temporary nature of archaeology activity has led a time to accept precarious living conditions that the establishment of preventive archaeology has contributed to denouncing and transforming. In this perspective, the focus on this evolution is particularly effective in disjointing the intricacies of two modes of existence : the precarious and the temporary.
The paper sets in prominence the newfound cooperation between engineering and archaeology. This integration of knowledge is particularly useful in the development of preventive archaeology that ...allows targeted excavations with a considerable saving of resources and a widening of the possibilities for the protection of the cultural heritage. In many cases, the engineering reading of the ancient buildings reveals surprisingly good construction practices in seismic areas. Particularly, the architectures of archaeological sites shows a series of cases that meet the criteria of seismic assessment by combining the formal and functional aspects of space destruction to the static and dynamic behaviour of the construction.
PDF
