Scott Archaeol Rev 7

Mark Edmonds & Julian Thomas (pp 1-2) open with 'Science fiction: scientism and technicism in archaeology', arguing not whether science is a good or bad thing, but how it should be deployed in archaeology. To reject the paraphernalia of much recent debate does not debar the use of comparative historical analysis, nor the possibility of a systematically constructed knowledge. Intellectual rigour is needed, not a naive belief in infallible and impartial science. Julian Thomas continues (2-7) with 'Silent running: the ills of environmental archaeology': he sees the environmentalists' failure to engage the ideas of structuralism, Marxism, hermeneutics, etc as resulting in a Britain peopled with pastoralists and swiddeners, all dominated by their environment. Do away with 'environmental archaeology' and acquire archaeologists who specialize in analysing snails, pollen, seeds, etc! Keith Ray (7-14) looks at 'Science and anomaly: burnt mounds in British prehistory', finding that published explanations tend to dwell on functional considerations (domestic cooking? or some other purpose?) which only shackles the investigative process. A contextual explanation would admit that function is locally variable and that the 'unitary' character of burnt mounds is a product of survival. John Moreland (14-23) looks at Braudelian Annalisme and its relationship with the New Archaeology in 'From the primeval to the paved: environment, perception, and structural history'. Both Braudel and the New Archaeologists fail to see that social groups have different perceptions of their surroundings - not all are homo economicus even if some have a need to 'tame' the 'wilderness' they find. 'Science, technology and society' is the subject of Mark Edmonds (23-30) who draws a distinction between the 'idea of science as a methodical, self-critical and potentially creative reasoning, and a crude scientism which privileges particular readings of archaeological data, simply because they conform to a restrictive definition of scientific procedure'. John C Barrett concludes (31-6) with 'Archaeology in the age of uncertainty', a critical examination of how archaeologists move from statements about the 'record' (the evidence as found) to statements about how the past may have been. The New Archaeology merely gave us a different kind of empiricism. Pace Binford, it is never possible to refute a model of the past by statements about data as found. Currently we are piling up too many catalogues of observations without the theoretical work which would help build a competent interpretative archaeology.

Examines the whole complex cycle of selection, procurement, manufacture, and use of raw material, integrating the evidence and setting it in context. The Binfordian concepts of curation, embedding, logistics and foraging, and time stress are adopted, with special reference to two sites, Smittons and Starr in SW Scotland. Rather than adopting Myers's 1989 hypothesis (90/333), an alternative is set out based on assumptions that microliths are not always projectile armatures, and that deerhunting is not necessarily the prime form of subsistence activity (aquatic resources being more predictable, etc). This model is developed in some detail, and the Starr-Smittons differences explained in terms of sites being in different cycles or circuits. Rhum-style recording (91/371) could be used to suggest ways of reconstructing regional patterning.

Explores some aspects of the nature of monumentality in prehistoric societies and of its relationship to other cultural manifestations. The Western Isles are chosen for their high degree of monument survival and their wide Atlantic connexions: consideration is given to Neo chambered tombs, Later Neo/BA stone circles, and Iron Age brochs and duns, with emphasis on minimizing period divisions. The marked distributional bias of chambered tombs needs explanation; the stone circles seem to suggest new power structures; BA hoards may substitute in the period when no monumental structures are built; and with Atlantic round houses, monumentality develops wholly within the domestic context, with broch towers showing the competitive process of displaying power. With their decline in turn (Early Historic period) comes an increased display of personal ornament.

Outlines the research design for the project which aims to consider a wide range of questions about cultural-social-economic change in protohistoric southern Scotland (centred on Newstead). Archaeologically comparable data are needed to allow testing of hypotheses about change (the effect of the Roman intrusion) and to provide a modern context for the rich extant collections from the area. Selective excavations will supplement extensive use of non-destructive survey, and palaeoecology of the Tweed Basin will be studied. Work in 1989 showed that high reliance could be placed on Curle's evidence. Public interest will be catered for.

The Thorpe Thewles Iron Age farmstead interpretation project is set in a building which overlooks the original site, a window on which is flanked by reconstruction paintings of the site at 100 BC and AD 100. At Norton the pagan AS cemetery has been interpreted using gravegoods to illustrate daily life, while still providing information on the cemetery layout. Both projects, while reaching different audiences, endeavour to integrate archaeology within ordinary community life. There are other projects for Guisborough Priory, at Loftus, and elsewhere in the area.

There are three main classes of research questions which archaeologists would like specialists in organic materials to address: artefacts made from organic materials (ie environmental, social, economic implications as well as 'traditional' studies); palaeoenvironmental indicators (still difficult to use incisively); and decay products of organic materials (eg gas chromatography of adipocere, beer residues, isotopic ratios for diet, etc). A five-point scheme to help determine what, if any, analyses are called for includes asking for prior publication in reputable scientific journals (to demonstrate validity), normal scientific experimentation standards, adequate sampling and checking for post-depositional contaminants, some understanding of taphonomy, and sticking to the point among the high-technology science!