Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Landscape Archaeology
View through CrossRef
Landscape archaeology is the study of how people interacted with their surroundings, as evidenced by the archaeological record. This may appear to be an all-encompassing remit, but not all archaeology is “landscape archaeology.” Rather, landscape archaeology involves those dimensions of archaeology that relate to place and may imbue many different archaeology projects. The notion of “landscape archaeology” became popular among archaeologists in the 1980s and has remained so ever since. This popularity came about as a result of a number of converging factors. In the 1960s and 1970s, the New Archaeology that revolutionized practice in much Anglophone archaeology brought with it a focus on environments as habitats and resource zones. The archaeology of cultural practices often became synonymous with, and reduced to, investigations of habitat and economy as adaptive practices. Yet cultures, and life—all the things that people do that leave archaeological traces—involve more than resources for survival. The notion of “landscape,” originating from the tradition of 16th–17th-century Dutch art, brought with it the idea that people, values, and representations are more than the environment as a source of material sustenance. “Social landscapes” and “social archaeology” became catchphrases that signaled this change in approach. A second factor that affected this changing attitude in the 1980s was the explosion of cultural heritage management projects that was taking place in light of industrial developments and the increasingly legislated government protection of archaeological sites. This necessitated a broader approach to archaeological landscapes beyond spatially isolated dots on maps, one that increasingly took into account the extensive terrains that contained the threatened sites. Third, the 1980s also saw an increased general awareness of the calls of First Nations peoples whose landscapes were being targeted for research as well as for destruction through developments. The individual sites that archaeologists often focused on were, and are, interconnected nodes in First Nations landscapes. In a supposedly postcolonial world—or at least one striving beyond colonialism—ethical behavior required a more considerate approach to “archaeological” (read “living First Nations”) landscapes. Landscape archaeology thus quickly emerged as a social archaeology that approached places as connected across space and through time, reaching into the present. Landscape archaeology continues to contribute to contemporary issues through engagement with questions of human adaptation to changing climates and sustainable development. Landscape archaeology takes place at nested spatial scales and considers the dimensions of life’s activities and perspectives across space. Such a broad remit is best approached through transdisciplinary research across multiple spatial scales. In this context, “landscape” has also served as a privileged shorthand for seascapes, riverscapes, skyscapes, and spiritscapes as well as the land. Two likely, connected reasons for this are that most people largely reside on the land, and archaeologists mainly look at things from fixed positions on the land, even if those things relate to the sky, waterways, and cosmologies. But in recent years, such a terrestrial perspective has been questioned by many researchers whose gaze has shifted toward the sea, sky, and other scapes.
Title: Landscape Archaeology
Description:
Landscape archaeology is the study of how people interacted with their surroundings, as evidenced by the archaeological record.
This may appear to be an all-encompassing remit, but not all archaeology is “landscape archaeology.
” Rather, landscape archaeology involves those dimensions of archaeology that relate to place and may imbue many different archaeology projects.
The notion of “landscape archaeology” became popular among archaeologists in the 1980s and has remained so ever since.
This popularity came about as a result of a number of converging factors.
In the 1960s and 1970s, the New Archaeology that revolutionized practice in much Anglophone archaeology brought with it a focus on environments as habitats and resource zones.
The archaeology of cultural practices often became synonymous with, and reduced to, investigations of habitat and economy as adaptive practices.
Yet cultures, and life—all the things that people do that leave archaeological traces—involve more than resources for survival.
The notion of “landscape,” originating from the tradition of 16th–17th-century Dutch art, brought with it the idea that people, values, and representations are more than the environment as a source of material sustenance.
“Social landscapes” and “social archaeology” became catchphrases that signaled this change in approach.
A second factor that affected this changing attitude in the 1980s was the explosion of cultural heritage management projects that was taking place in light of industrial developments and the increasingly legislated government protection of archaeological sites.
This necessitated a broader approach to archaeological landscapes beyond spatially isolated dots on maps, one that increasingly took into account the extensive terrains that contained the threatened sites.
Third, the 1980s also saw an increased general awareness of the calls of First Nations peoples whose landscapes were being targeted for research as well as for destruction through developments.
The individual sites that archaeologists often focused on were, and are, interconnected nodes in First Nations landscapes.
In a supposedly postcolonial world—or at least one striving beyond colonialism—ethical behavior required a more considerate approach to “archaeological” (read “living First Nations”) landscapes.
Landscape archaeology thus quickly emerged as a social archaeology that approached places as connected across space and through time, reaching into the present.
Landscape archaeology continues to contribute to contemporary issues through engagement with questions of human adaptation to changing climates and sustainable development.
Landscape archaeology takes place at nested spatial scales and considers the dimensions of life’s activities and perspectives across space.
Such a broad remit is best approached through transdisciplinary research across multiple spatial scales.
In this context, “landscape” has also served as a privileged shorthand for seascapes, riverscapes, skyscapes, and spiritscapes as well as the land.
Two likely, connected reasons for this are that most people largely reside on the land, and archaeologists mainly look at things from fixed positions on the land, even if those things relate to the sky, waterways, and cosmologies.
But in recent years, such a terrestrial perspective has been questioned by many researchers whose gaze has shifted toward the sea, sky, and other scapes.
Related Results
Modern Scotland: Archaeology, the Modern past and the Modern present
Modern Scotland: Archaeology, the Modern past and the Modern present
The main recommendations of the panel report can be summarised under five key headings: HUMANITY The Panel recommends recognition that research in this field should be geared tow...
Integrating landscape ecology into landscape practice in Central African Rainforests
Integrating landscape ecology into landscape practice in Central African Rainforests
Abstract
Context
We describe how large landscape-scale conservation initiatives involving local communities, NGOs and resource managers have engaged...
Processual Archaeology
Processual Archaeology
Processual archaeology (also known as new or scientific archaeology) is a theoretical movement rooted in the 1960s–1970s (although some argue both for an earlier start and for its ...
Landscape science in Ukraine: The current state and trends
Landscape science in Ukraine: The current state and trends
The state of landscape science in Ukraine has been considered since the early 2000s, when, moving away from the Soviet canons of this science, it acquired its own face and its lead...
Sculpture as Landscape: Archaeology and the Englishness of Henry Moore
Sculpture as Landscape: Archaeology and the Englishness of Henry Moore
The interplay in English thought between archaeology and landscape has been a long-standing one. Even before the notion of ‘landscape’ was well defined as an artistic genre, antiqu...
Spatiotemporal evolution of landscape stability in World Heritage Karst Sites: a case study of Shibing Karst and Libo-Huanjiang Karst
Spatiotemporal evolution of landscape stability in World Heritage Karst Sites: a case study of Shibing Karst and Libo-Huanjiang Karst
Abstract
Landscape stability is a paramount concern within the field of landscape ecology. Indices of landscape patterns not only facilitate an effective analysis of land...
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LANDSCAPE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM OF COMMUNES: CHO RA, BA BE, PHUC LOC, THUONG MINH AND DONG PHUC, THAI NGUYEN PROVINCE
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LANDSCAPE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM OF COMMUNES: CHO RA, BA BE, PHUC LOC, THUONG MINH AND DONG PHUC, THAI NGUYEN PROVINCE
The paper builds a landscape classification system to clarify the characteristics of landscape units in the communes of Cho Ra, Ba Be, Phuc Loc, Thuong Minh, and Dong Phuc, Thai Ng...
Fresh air: Space–time and new models for landscape painting
Fresh air: Space–time and new models for landscape painting
Abstract
What is the place of landscape painting today? What is landscape painting and what can it do? What questions does it allow us to ask? Landscape painting has...

