2024-03-29T13:38:59Zhttp://digital.csic.es/dspace-oai/requestoai:digital.csic.es:10261/1368642016-12-05T12:23:15Zcom_10261_36691com_10261_7col_10261_36692
2016-09-16T07:55:46Z
urn:hdl:10261/136864
Archaeological revolution(s)
González-Ruibal, Alfredo
I understand Kristian Kristiansen’s enthusiasm for the seemingly infinite
possibilities offered by the collaboration between the natural sciences
and archaeology. Gone are the days when archaeometry was associated
with a narrow, functionalist agenda. We know now that we can recover
past habitus, memory or social identity through the application of “archaeological science”. (I hate the concept, though: is it not science when
we do not use a microscope?) I also agree with his plea for a return to
the production of grand narratives. In fact, I have always been a great
fan of his masterful grand narrative:
Europe before History
(Kristiansen 1998). The approach proposed in this article, however, does not re
ject the small and the local. On the contrary, it tries to bridge the gap
between the micro and the macro, bypassing an unhelpful dichotomy.
I also find very revealing the historiographic analysis proposed by the
author. Nevertheless, I have some misgivings about his paradigmatic
enthusiasm that I will try to flesh out in this comment.
2016-09-16T07:55:46Z
2016-09-16T07:55:46Z
2014
2016-09-16T07:55:46Z
artículo
Current Swedish Archaeology 22: 41-45 (2014)
http://hdl.handle.net/10261/136864
eng
Sí
closedAccess
Nordic Academic Press