Bringing it Together

     This blog started out with an overview of anthropology. Then quickly went to a post about religion and then on to some posts about archaeology. I'd like to continue the archaeology discussion here a bit and try and bring some of this together. Each of the four fields of anthropology (recall: cultural, archaeology, biological and linguistics from the first post) has its own claim to fame and its own uniqueness that makes it worthy of study and important to the whole field of anthroplogy. I just finished reading an article by Monica L. Smith, entitled "Archaeology as a Gateway to the Four Fields" (2009) in which Smith details some of the reasons why archaeology tends to be the way in which many people come to learn about anthropology for the first time. Monica L. Smith got her PhD at the University of Michigan and she is currently a professor at UCLA. Her subfield is archaeology and she specializes in urbanism, economic networks, consumption and material culture, anthropology of food, comparative historical archaeology; South Asia, Mediterranean, Southwestern U.S.

Why Archaeology?

     Archaeology is the subfield with the biggest public media presence. The media allows students to gain a curiousity about what archaeology really is and this gives college professors the opportunity to discuss archaeology and the relation it has to the other fields. Smith (2009) says that she "teaches a large introduction to archaeology course, and with 400 students in fall 2009 it is one of the largest social science courses at (her) university. Many students enroll for general education credits and are unlikely to take another anthropology course" (26). As we discussed in the last post characters like Indiana Jones or Lara Croft: Tomb Raider put archaeology into the public eye and these introductory courses are a professor's chance to capture the interest of students for anthropology.

Archaeology 101

     When Professor Smith was an assistant professor, at the time she wrote this article, she taught the intro class for archaeology. She pulled away from the idea that archaeology was just about digging up "old stuff" (26). She wanted students to realize that archaeology was all about human interaction, and specifically human interaction with material culture. "I start the course with a discussion of trash as a ubiquitous and meaningful signature of human activity: a banana peel that is not a clue about our local environment but a marker of robust trade connections, a box of dental floss that reveals how specialized our production and consumption processes have become, a burnt-out birthday candle that shows how symbolism can transform objects beyond the concept of practical utility, a penny with scraped-off bubblegum stuck to it that reveals how context determines the perceived worth of an object" (Smith: 26). This idea of modernizing the archaeological process is one that is echoed in many introductory classes around the country.

http://everythingnallarchaeology.com/garbology-what-does-your-trash-say-about-you/

Bringing it together

     As her course continues she brings the other three subfields into the conversation. She talks about the ways in which the material culture of our ancestors through Homo and earlier, such as australopithecenes, can tell about the history of our interactions and how evolutionary changes in our body structure also help to give pieces to the puzzle of modern day humanity. In the area of linguistics she discusses the interaction with signs and visual histories through rock paintings and the advent of writing. She also discusses ideas about the process in which sound was codified into written symbols and words. Finally she goes into how archaeology works with cultural anthropology, two subfields that are very closely linked. Cultural anthropology being largely the creation and interaction of social groups she suggests that archaeology has a role of "examining the material evidence for socially cohesive acts such as monument construction and shared rituals, as well as socially divisive acts such as warfare" (Smith: 26).

     The four subfields only work when there are cross compared with each other. If you look to studies and universities outside of America there is only one field: anthropology and thus the four parts are always working as one. "Cultural perspectives also bring the class full circle, enabling students to critically assess why the past as a concept has value for present-day people and how abstract notions of identity are materialized through archaeological remains" (Smith: 26).

References:

2009. Smith, Monica L. "Archaeology as a Gateway to the Four Fields". Anthropology News. (50, 9). December 2009. p. 26.

UCLA: Anthropology. Monica L. Smith. http://www.anthro.ucla.edu/people/faculty?lid=1325. Accessed April 18th, 2013.