باستان‌شناسی

Very Short Introductions #010

by Paul G. Bahn, کامیار عبدی (Translator)

کتاب حاضر به این منظور نوشته شده که با عرضه‌ی پاره‌ای از مقدمات باستان‌شناسی، کنجکاوی خوانندگان را برانگیزد تا به انبوه نوشته‌های مربوط به باستان‌شناسی نگاهی عمیق‌تر بیندازند، کمی پژوهش یا کار میدانی بکنند و به دانش‌آموزان و دانشجویان کمک کند تصمیم بگیرند دوره‌ای را در زمینه‌ی باستان‌شناسی بگذرانند.

Genres: Archaeology, History, Nonfiction, Science, Anthropology, Ancient History, Ebooks

165 pages, Paperback

First published January 19, 1997

About the author

Paul G. Bahn is a British archaeologist, translator, writer and broadcaster who has published extensively on a range of archaeological topics, with particular attention to prehistoric art. He is a contributing editor to Archaeology magazine.

Reviews

[Lili Kyurkchiyska · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ако някой очаква да научи всичко за археологията от тази книга, ще има да взема. Това е просто въведението. За онези, на които не им е достатъчно, да погледнат Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice.

[فؤاد · Rating 3 out of 5]

کتاب مقدماتی بدی نبود، یه کم از اینجا یه کم از اونجا چیزهایی در مورد رشتهٔ باستان‌شناسی گفت، اما خودش همون اول کار خواننده رو ارجاع داد به درآمدی کوتاه بر باستانشناسی. اونم کتاب کوچیکیه. یه وقتی باید اونم بخونم.

[Nicky · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was okay, but honestly? If you're interested in archaeology, watch out for the "Archaeology's Dirty Little Secrets" course to run again on Coursera. It covers a lot of the same issues, but in more depth, with more examples, and obviously with the chance to interact with a lot more people/opinions (even if you just watch the videos). The assignments help you focus on and get to grips with the techniques and discussions.

This book is... much more basic. It's very informal, often very personal to the author (as where he sneers at theories he doesn't agree with, or makes snide comments about other people working in the field). There are some useful bits, and it's certainly an easy (and very brief) read, but mostly I think you'd be better investing a bit more time in this, via Coursera or via other, better books.

One section that rather riled me was the whole bit about "feminist archaeology", mostly using those scare quotes. Bahn falls into pretty much every pitfall in talking about feminism, claiming for example that the history of men is now going to be ignored, and comparing women to slaves who will want to be masters. Right. Thanks, dude.

[Fatemeh · Rating 3 out of 5]

کتاب خیلی چیزی برای گفتن نداره و واسه همین منم نمیدونم باید چه ریویو ایی براش بنویسم.
نه اینکه کتاب بدی باشه اما کاملا مقدماتیه ،شبیه این سمپل هاییه که جلو فروشگاه بهت میدن که بری تست کنی و اگر دوست داشتی بری فول سایز اون چیز رو بخری.

در واقع این کتاب میاد اون کلیشه هایی که آدما از باستان شناسی رو دارند پاک میکنه و واقعیت این رشته رو نشون میده و میگه حالا اگر باز هم از این واقعیت که خیلی با اون تصورات فاصله داره خوشت اومده ،خوب برو بیشتر بخون ،رسالت کتاب دقیقا تا همینجاست .

کتاب به چیز های مختلفی یه گریز کوتاه میزنه مثلا به پیچیدگی های قدمت سنجی،رابطه میان این رشته و رشته های دیگه،اصلاحات رایج باستان شناسی و …. میپردازه .

کتاب بعدی که در مورد این رشته خواهم خوند احتمالا باستان شناسی for dummies باشه و فکر میکنم با توجه به حجم کتاب ،اطلاعات جامع تری داشته باشه.

[Alice · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've learned many interesting things from this book but the author clearly doesn't know the meaning of the word "feminism"(chapter 8).
Anyway it was a decent introduction to a subject that I've never studied.

[Talie · Rating 3 out of 5]

از کتاب مقدماتی مثل این کتاب انتظار زیادی نمی توان داشت
سر فصل ها را به صورت کلی بررسی کرده بود
بیشتر باعث ایجاد سوال در ذهنم شد
این نقل قول کتاب در مورد علوم و به خصوص باستان شناسی شاه بیت
کتاب بود:
بخش عمده ای از علم با داستان سرایی پیش می رود. البته به معنای
خوب. ولی به هر حال داستان داستان است. مثلن به داستان های متداول
در مورد تطور انسان توجه کنید: ماجراهای مربوط به شکار، حلقه ی
دور آتش، غارهای تاریک، مراسم گوناگون...مرگ، چقدر از این
داستان ها بر اساس استخوان ها و دست ساخته ست و چقدر آن بر اساس کلیشه های ادبی؟

[Readersaurus · Rating 1 out of 5]

It's frightfully smashing that Bertie Wooster has written this very short introduction to archaeology. What-ho!

This is a weird book. I do NOT recommend that anyone read it as a first introduction to archaeology.

The tone is flip and silly. The author spends the first chapter saying there's too much being published in archaeology today, so much so that it is not even worth the space on library shelves. Then he says there aren't enough archaeologists to do the analysis. He ends the chapter by pooh-poohing the very premises on which the discipline is based. (In the next chapter, he basically says no archaeologists are smart enough to understand the science behind any archaeological dating techniques.)

Tell, me, why did Bahn choose to write this book? Apparently, he's written a lot of books on archaeology but, he doesn't seem to respect it as a field of study. He focuses on archaeology's failings and, of all things, on the inbred politics of 1960s academe. Why would anyone need to know that stuff in an introductory volume? If I were new to archaeology, I would want to know the principles on which it's based, field and lab practices, a few major contributions that archaeology has made to our understanding of humanity's past, and what archaeologists are working towards now. I would not want cheesy political cartoons and his bizarrely outdated whining about feminism.

[Niloofar karimi · Rating 5 out of 5]

برای اشنایی مختصر و مفید با رشته باستان‌شناسی خیلی مفیده و هر باستان شناس و دانشجوی باستان‌شناسی خوبه که یبار بخونتش. مترجمش هم دکتر کامیار عبدی یکی از باستان‌شناسان درجه یک حال حاضر کشور هستند که قلم خیلی خوبی هم دارن

[Shahab · Rating 4 out of 5]

کتاب باستان شناسی از مجوعه مختصر مفید نشر ماهی که در اصل ترجمه شده سری کتاب های very short introduction دانشگاه آکسفورد بوده و از سال ۱۹۹۵ در حال انتشار است. ازین مجموعه به زبان انگلیسی تاحالا بیش از ۷۴۰ عنوان کتاب چاپ شده که لیست کاملش رو میشه از صفحه ویکی پدیا مشاهده کرد.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_...

تنوع موضوعات سری اصلی به قدری بالاست که به سختی میشه موضوعی پیدا کرد که کتابی ازش در این لیست نباشه

کتاب باستان شناسی ازین مجموعه که در ایران با شکل و شمایل و قطع و طرح جلد نسخه اصلی منتشر شده خلاصه خیلی کوتاهی درباره باستان شناسی، تولد و پیشرفت و ابعاد مختلف این علم و همچنین ترسیم آینده این مساله است. همچنین در آخر کتاب لیست کتاب و مقالاتی برای مطالعه بیشتر درباره همه موضوعات طرح شده کتاب قرار گرفته
باستان‌شناسی مولود علاقه انسانها به شناخت گذشته است و اولین باستان شناس دنیا نبونیدوس شاه بابل بوده که معبد نرامسین متعلق به ۳۲۰۰ سال قبل رو پیدا کرد. یکی از ویژگی های اصلی باستان شناسی و کارکردهاش تعیین قدمت و عمرسنجی اشیا و اماکن و وسایل مکشوفه است. برای این کار ده ها روش مختلف توسعه داده شده که بشه برای هرچیزی از آجر و سنگ و سفال گرفته تا بقایای زیستی و ابزارآلات عمر و قدمت دقیقش رو مشخص کرد.
بعد دیگر باستان شناسی شناخت طرز زندگی، عقاید و تفکر انسان های باستان و قدیمی تر از ماست. کشف ابزار و نقاشی ها و وسایل باقیمانده از انسان های گذشته، طرز خانه سازی و ملاتی که برای مسکن استفاده میکردند، وسایلی که همراه اموات دفن میشده و حتی باقیمانده غذا در شکم موجوداتی که به طور سالم کشف شدن اطلاعات فوق العاده زیادی به ما خواهد داد. مثلا زن ثروتمندی که بر اثر خوردن چندکیلو هندوانه فوت کرده و الان بعد از ۲۵۰۰ سال از شکمش ۱۳۰ هسته هندوانه پیدا شده هم اطلاعاتی درباره رژیم غذایی مردم منطقه میده هم فرهنگ و طبقات اجتماعیشون
در اصل باستان شناسی یک نوع کارآگاهی در تاریخ بسیار دوره و باید از طریق مطالعه کشفیات گذشته به شناخت دوران باستان کمک کنه
شاید برخلاف چیزی که در ذهن ما باشه، اینقدر وسایل و ابزار و مواد مختلف طی تحقیقات باستان شناسان کشف شده که امروز موزه ها و انبارها حتی جا برای حفاظت از اونها ندارند و حتی موزه های بزرگ هم درگیر آرشیو کردن صدها هزار قطعه کشف شده از گذشته ها هستند. همین موضوع بازاری برای قاچاقچیان عتیقه درست کرده و به نظر میرسه نفع اقتصادی که این دلال ها از خرید و فروش میبرن خیلی بیشتر از نفع علمی و اطلاعاتی ما از زحمات باستان شناس هاست.
اگر به باستان شناسی علاقه دارید که این کتاب شروع خوبی برای سیر مطالعاتی گسترده درباره این موضوعه اگر هم علاقه ندارید شاید مثل من ریسک کنید و این کتاب ۱۶۰ صفحه ای رو بخونید حداقل به قدری اطلاعات ازین فضا به دست بیارید که براتون کافی باشه

در کل مجموعه مختصر مفید نشر ماهی رو دریابید

[Seema Singh · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am not that interested in the subject but the author was very good. It was written very well with lots of humour so a very easy, pleasant read.

[Joy · Rating 1 out of 5]

I don't normally review books but I couldn't not say anything about this one. I read this book for a class and have to assumed that the professor himself did not read it before assigning it. My edition is a second edition that was published 8 years ago and I cannot fathom how it managed to make it to a second print when it contains blatant sexism, racism and a host of other biases. Paul Bahn clearly needs to read his own chapter on recognizing the inherent biases found in scholarly research.

[Sulaf Farhat · Rating 2 out of 5]

A concise book on a very interesting subject, written, apparently, by a disgruntled teenager!!
I was really interested in the subject of the book, but didn't really care for the writing style. It did arouse my curiosity though, and I think I'd love to read further on archaeology in the future.

[S A N I A]

Bahn mentions minorities and colonization in archaeology, but still fails to do justice to these more than ever important and relevant subjects. A feminist approach is very much needed and is NOT a threat to the study of men in the past.

[Sean · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not the same quality as most of this series-- unattractively curmudgeonly.

[Cathy DuPont · Rating 3 out of 5]

While this was interesting, not sure I would depend on it if I dug as an amateur. But as a starter on the subject, it was ok.

[Mateen Ar · Rating 2 out of 5]

I learned much from the first half of this book, upto and including chapter six. Chapters seven and onwards seemed forced and lacking.

A fair amount of information on what archaeology is can be gleaned here, but nothing on whatis expected daily from archaeologists, what the academic field is like (despite the digression about the new archeologists). The author does offer a pragmatic approach to the divisions within the field, and especially the responsibility of the professional archaeologist to the public.

The book fails to shake off the taint of patriarchal influence, despite its many attempts to show the authors egalitarian views regarding gender in the context of archaeology. In chapter 8, the author is glad that women are finding their place in what was traditionally a male dominated field. He then follows this with a passionate plea that the male dominated form of sexism should not swing to the other extreme, which is fair. But then he criticises attempts to attribute finds from a site to feminine contexts, calling this pointless, claiming this to be too large a leap. Reading this section was frustrating. Why this sudden turn against speculation, especially considering how the author had before been highlighting the role of doubt and guesses in archaeological reconstruction of past society.

Overall, as a historian who'd largely avoided learning about archaeology, this felt like a good introduction. I'd have told anyone else that they'd learn much about the field, but not about how the job is done.

[Ayyuce Demirbas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Güzel ve açıklyıcı. Ancak yazar feminizmin anlamını pek bilmiyor anlaşılan. Feminizm kadın erkek eşitliğini savunur. "... ama ileriye gitmenin asıl yolu geleneksel madalyonun öbür yüzünden ibaret bir feminist arkeolojiden ziyade, cinsiyetçi olmayan dengeli bir arkeolojidir.". Feminizm eşitliği savunduğu için feminist arkeoloji zaten cinsiyetçi olmayan dengeli arkeoloji anlamına gelir.

[Soňa · Rating 1 out of 5]

If the author didn’t abuse Camus’s quote in one part to compare women to slaves, it would’ve been better 🙂

[Michael Beck · Rating 2 out of 5]

Basic overview. Read like an opinionated blog post at times.

[Yasmin · Rating 1 out of 5]

Despite the book being published in 1996 it is horribly dated. Bahn has used this little book not to explore a "stimulating way in to a subject (as per the back cover) but to air out his prejudices, biases, sexism and racism. He calls the "angry young men" that came up with "New Archaeology" as patronising when his whole tone throughout the book has been incredibly patronising towards the reader. He seems to be writing as if speaking to children and mocking their intelligence. The book has achieved the belief in me that all archaeologists are overgrown men-children sanctified in white able bodied male privilege. He roundly mocks women (then) trying to get into the field, saying "sexism rubs both ways"--it doesn't. He generously declares Indigenous peoples asking for consultation as "reasonable", but when they ask for their history back he more or less calls it extreme! He claims relations between Indigenous peoples and archaeologists are improved--as far as I know "demands" (as he calls it) for cultural heritage from museums is still on going. He seems to think archaeologists "helped" Indigenous peoples "put their cultures back together". That alone requires serious unpacking, it was only ever for archaeologists to have "live" exhibits in museums as under the guise of philanthropists in the 19th century, but he wouldn't mention that! Nor why Indigenous peoples "needed help" putting their cultures back together. He refuses to name names about perceived "problematic" archaeologists citing "they know who they are" and complaining they bitch and stab each other--and yet has no issue doing the same thing to these "angry young men", "feminist archaeologists", but leaves out the "young Turks"--whatever that means. Usually the Very Short Introductions are enjoyable and interesting, however, this was not. I'm even sorry Barry Cunliffe praised the book--I have liked Cunliffe's books in the past. I don't know how I went on with this...I haven't.

[André · Rating 2 out of 5]

Muito mais adequado seria: Arqueologia: Uma Péssima Introdução.

Informal, partidário, repleto de dados históricos absurdamente irrelevantes e de trocadilhos e comentários igualmente desapropriados (que apenas servem para perpetuar conflitos entre diferentes escolas e, por conseguinte, denegrir a imagem da Arqueologia e daqueles que a praticam), ambíguo, sexista — enfim, o extremo oposto daquilo que se espera de um livro introdutório de carácter científico. Inclusive, podemos a dada altura perguntar-nos se o autor está de facto interessado em abordar o tema ou apenas a servir-se da oportunidade para se afirmar contra determinados procedimentos ou autoridades científicas com as quais não simpatiza.

Se não o recomendo a alguém já iniciado na área (como é o meu ainda modesto caso), muito menos o recomendo ao leitor que procura um primeiro contacto com a disciplina. Não será, por certo, difícil encontrar outra obra que se preste melhor a esse efeito, não devendo de todo excluir-se o que já muito foi escrito por autores portugueses.

[Kiely · Rating 3 out of 5]

this was an okay introduction to the practice of archeology (or, as the Brits say, “archaeology”), but I took offense to some of the author’s opinions that Native people are often too strict about what can taken or tested from their land (????) and that “feminist archeology” is unreasonable and unfair to the men working in archeology (???????). mostly tho I realized that, while I’m interested in archeology, I’m not really interested in carbon dating and lab work, I’m mostly interested in the stories of the major things that were discovered and the people who discovered them, which, unfortunately, means that I’m really just interested in stories of (mostly) old white British / American men from the 1800s — early 1900s 😔 lmao

[Liz De Coster · Rating 2 out of 5]

This introduction was probably too short. The tone of the book was very informal, often gossipy, which I found detracted from the information being explained. Some ideas were left unexplained (e.g., the Terracotta Army was referenced twice but never described) while entire sections were devoted entirely to professional navel-gazing. I would have appreciated more information on archaeology in the sense of historical information, rather than details of the professional.

[Maxwell Forton · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good overall introduction to archaeology for students, but the edition we used is definitely outdated in its chapters concerning gender and the rights of indigenous peoples. The author equates Feminist Theory with being just the opposite side of the same sexist coin as male centric archaeology. This false equivocation fails to grasp the need for specialized research into historically oppressed groups of people. Hopefully the newer additions have corrected this misjudgment.

[Ketiana Osias · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.25-3.5
A good book on introducing you to the field of archaeology. It was a short and informative read but the author likes to make little snide comments, which I honestly didn’t care for.

[Michael Huang · Rating 5 out of 5]

Humans are always interested in the past. A 5th century Thracian princess liked to collect stone axes and was buried with a lot. Now excavations are a lot more careful and you can learn more from what’s found. Archaeology is a sub area in anthropology. In this little VSI, you get a very good picture of the discipline.

What do archaeologists do? Study excavated remains and objects. These are varied and interesting: the example of 138 watermelon seeds in the wife of Marquis of Dai in 2nd century BC; the analysis that shows some sort of rice wine made in 9000 years ago; chemical analysis of teeth can suggest in what climate a person grew up; and the Iceman with frozen sperms that many women volunteer to be impregnated with. By and large, there isn’t a lot of new excavation as there’s too much backlog. The only exception is salvage excavation at construction site and the like. Looting is a big enemy. In some cases there is a different challenge: some (e.g., militant ultra-orthodox Jews) violently resist any excavation due to desecration of graves.

What kind of tools do they use and what kind of work? Techniques are improving: Chemical dating for bones and Electron Spin Resonance can stretch dating back to 100 kilo-years ago (kya). A South African cave of Australopithecus remains was identified as promising by analysis of Google Earth. But some times it’s less high tech: Archaeologists will copy stone tools, use them to study wear patterns.

What can they teach us? They can tell us a lot about the past.
• Cognitive activities: Archaeologists can tell that deliberate burial happened some time 100-40kya. Judging from the pollen on the body, there were flowers with the burial. A figurine dated 230kya shows under microscopic analysis to be man made art object clearly suggesting cognitive activity. There is now grudging acceptance of stone henges to be some sort of calendar device. Overall, such “cognitive archaeology” can provide some valid assessments of mind long vanished from the earth.
• Social structure: Ancient societies are loosely categorized into 4 types based on size: band (<100 ppl), tribe, chiefdom (5-20K), and state. Stonehenge is estimated to cost 30 million man-hours and clearly suggests some form of chiefdom.
• Ancient technologies: Their study of ancient agriculture practices in Nabotene and Bolivia helped revive these techniques to make life better than otherwise.

What are archeologists like? Here, you’ll find some pretty funny (at least to me) description of the lot. A few extensive quotes are in order:
“Conversely, the degree of territoriality, bitchiness, backstabbing, and vicious infighting for some reason goes way beyond what is normally encountered in other disciplines. There are inevitably a few archaeologists who are pompous, hypocritical, dishonest, pretentious, self-promoting, and unprincipled, but that does not stop them doing well in the profession.”

“…much theoretical archaeology simply consists of techniques to find unsurprising answers to obvious questions which nobody had the time, tools, or inclination to ask before.”

[Kimia Amin Gharagozlu · Rating 5 out of 5]

درک حداقلی، ساده و جالبی از باستان شناسی به آدمایی مثل من میده که هیچ تصوری از این رشته نداشتد و صرفا علاقه‌مند بودند.

[Sema]

If we want to know where we’re going, we need to trace our trajectory, to see where we’ve come from. That is why archaeology is so important.

[Sooryaprakash · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gained insights on how methodology used in archaeology. History behind this discipline is fascinating.

[Gwen A-B · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting I’d recommend to anyone trying to get into archaeology who already has an interest in history. I definitely learned something, how much of that I will retain is yet to be seen.