Communicating Classical Archaeology in the Twenty-First Century

Room 164 0207 631 6808 [email protected]

Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 2008

2007

Archaeologists often enjoy the role of giving the people what the people want, at least, so long as that is information about the past. But besides the ambition to enlighten people about the past, there are at least two alternative approaches concerning the way archaeology communicates with its publics in society. One considers archaeology a business and sees people as potential customers who need to be persuaded to buy the products of archaeology. Another approach advocates democratic participation of people in archaeology and wishes to accommodate people's own preferences regarding archaeological studies. The point of this article is not to choose between these different models of communication but to ensure that future debates about the relations between archaeology and society will be informed by a better understanding of some fundamentally different approaches concerning the aims and character of archaeology's communication with various public audiences. Hopefully this discussion will also benefit very specific, future projects in public archaeology and thus ultimately serve both the archaeologists and their publics.

2021

On behalf of the 'Associazione Internazionale di Archeologia Classica (AIAC)' the 19 th International Congress for Classical Archaeology took place in Cologne and Bonn from 22 to 26 May 2018. It was jointly organized by the two Archaeological Institutes of the Universities of Cologne and Bonn, and the primary theme of the congress was 'Archaeology and Economy in the Ancient World'. In fact, economic aspects permeate all areas of public and private life in ancient societies, whether in urban development, religion, art, housing, or in death. Research on ancient economies has long played a significant role in ancient history. Increasingly in the last decades, awareness has grown in archaeology that the material culture of ancient societies offers excellent opportunities for studying the structure, performance, and dynamics of ancient economic systems and economic processes. Therefore, the main objective of this congress was to understand economy as a central element of classical societies and to analyze its interaction with ecological, political, social, religious, and cultural factors. The theme of the congress was addressed to all disciplines that deal with the Greco-Roman civilization and their neighbouring cultures from the Aegean Bronze Age to the end of Late Antiquity. The participation of more than 1.200 scholars from more than 40 countries demonstrates the great response to the topic of the congress. Altogether, more than 900 papers in 128 panels were presented, as were more than 110 posters. The publication of the congress is in two stages: larger panels are initially presented as independent volumes, such as this publication. Finally, at the end of the editing process, all contributions will be published in a joint conference volume. We would like to take this opportunity to thank all participants and helpers of the congress who made it such a great success. Its realization would not have been possible without the generous support of many institutions, whom we would like to thank once again: the Universities of Bonn and Cologne, the Archaeological Society of Cologne, the Archaeology Foundation of Cologne, the Gerda Henkel Foundation, the Fritz Thyssen Foundation, the Sal. Oppenheim Foundation, the German Research Foundation (DFG), the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), the Romano-Germanic Museum Cologne and the LVR-LandesMuseum Bonn. Finally, our thanks go to all colleagues and panel organizers who were involved in the editing and printing process.

Developing Effective Communication Skills in Archaeology, 2020

This chapter is not an essay on the theory of communication, but an outline that flanks the main themes with those of the reality of archaeology in the era of globalization. It starts from an inescapable base, on which any other approach can be grafted: the physical-mathematical theory of communication. From here, after attention to various possible logical fallacies in which those who communicate archeology may encounter, cases are examined in the light of the media theories, established in the second half of the 20th century, that predicted the current computer-dominated situation. Finally, some shortcomings are identified which must be remedied to not compromise the effectiveness of communication in archaeology.

European Journal of Archaeology, 2007

How should archaeology – its fascinations and frustrations, its discoveries and discourses, its theories and models – be communicated? What should archaeologists try to communicate, and how? To whom are they trying to communicate? Is the level of communication within archaeology or among archaeologists, sufficient? Do they, or rather, should they, communicate to their diverse audiences in the same way? And if not, how are they to decide on the best means of communication to any given audience? Is publication on the printed page the future, or will electronic media take over?

chapter in book in English, 2011

The paper considers classical archaeology as one of the first and oldest branches of archaeology practised in Europe taking into account the fact that interest in the relics of ancient civilisations is deeply inscribed in the self-identification of various peoples of Europe, in the grounds of their cultural identity. A wider problem concerning the 'living antiquity’ observed in the history of Europe is mentioned as well, and the causes of such vitality which is the reason why we spoke and most often still speak of the Greco-Roman foundations of European civilisation, albeit some argue that such an approach to Antiquity has already declined. It is a known fact that the splendour of Greece shone also on the ancient Roman world but it seems that it happened not only by way of appropriation of cultural achievements. Despite the difficult Roman-Greek relationship and exploitative Roman attitude to the Greek cultural heritage, to some extent cultural exchange took place on the basis of reciprocity. What's more, it is ultimately through the mediation of the Romans that the Hellenic culture flourished on various areas of their huge empire and was thus passed to subsequent periods of history. You could say that already in antiquity the first synthesis of complex achievements of the ancient culture took place on a great scale. It would then influence the medieval and Renaissance Europe, and from modern times each epoch would create its own model of antiquity and make further interpretations and syntheses of its sophisticated achievements. We are therefore entitled to state that the classic legacy is a common past of the whole Europe (thus classical archaeology is all European countries’ own archaeology), regardless of the extent to which the prehistory also creates the past, and to what extent it is formed by archaeologies of the regions and peoples, who in vast majority lived outside the classical world. Therefore, classical archaeology held an exceptionally privileged position for a long time (which is not the case nowadays, when all disciplines are treated equally and research assume a pluralistic approach), because, to some extent, similar to classical studies, it not only dealt with exploring the ancient past, but was to read the values developed in the ancient world and communicate them to next generations. Moreover, these values were drawn from the concept of 'Hellenism', developed already in the eighteenth century, continued in nineteenth, which idealised this unique, classic Greek past which was believed to have been the almost exclusive roots of 'Europeanism'. However, there are two factors that seem to be the main reasons of the independent development of classical archaeology in relation to other branches of archaeology and of its specific character. On the one hand, it is a huge amount of ancient works of art, as well as iconographic representations, temples and other buildings, which preserved to modern times. This legacy - or rather its magnitude and aesthetic qualities – contributed to focusing on the study of art and architecture in classical archaeology, and at the same time lack of interest and underestimation of all other relics of ancient material culture. On the other hand, a huge number of ancient written sources, including primarily the numerous inscriptions, set classical archaeology in a privileged position in relation to archaeology of prehistoric societies. Written sources, always regarded as more important than material remains, only 'illustrating' the former, were almost uncritically considered for a long time a 'real' insight into the ancient world. In the next part of the paper the problem of a very complex relations of classical archaeology and art history, is thoroughly discussed by the author. To conclude the author underlie the fact that archaeology, as well as other disciplines, attempts to preserve a character of a sovereign discipline with a precise research field. It is directed towards specific phenomena of the past cultural and social life, examined primarily through available material remains. However, by opening up more and more for collaboration with other disciplines, it also gets rid of its limitations and total dependence on one controlling humanistic discipline, which is important for classical archaeology regarding its strong connections with classical philology and art history. Nevertheless, she would say that this should not mean distancing itself and giving up this huge and great tradition - on the contrary, it should be rethought and included again in today's research. The authority of science lies in its achievements, jointly produced by scholars, namely the tradition, which is also subject to continuous development and change. The authority of a well-understood tradition does not stand in opposition to the freedom of undertaking new research. In case of archaeology, as one of the disciplines studying the past, we must realise that all questions about the past are asked from the position of the present, therefore, these are questions not only about the past itself, but also about contemporary people, thinking about the past from a particular cultural perspective. The way of thinking about the past is thus in this case a form of communicating the researchers’ own choices of values and thus an informed and open to others form of participating in a culture in which they are positioned. Ewa Bugaj reiterates the opinion stated already at the beginning of the text that our era, like the previous ones, creates its own model of antiquity and makes its own interpretations of its numerous achievements. We should hope that classical archaeology will show an inspiring role of antiquity in our times, as it functions with full knowledge that preserved texts, ideas, representations, as well as material culture of ancient Greece and Rome, for a very long time remained key for the Western world in the process of adaptation of the past in order to authenticate the present. Modern scholars, however, must take into consideration both the recognized use and abuse of the past. Hence, today's classical archaeology significantly broadens its field of research trying to describe the 'social life', the roles and importance of ancient material culture in the contemporary socio-cultural context. In so doing, it takes into account the reflections on the concept of the social agency of things, the strength of their impact, not only knowledge of them, recorded in the social memory. It also considers the influence of ancient artefacts on the senses of the recipient, with all their properties, such as visibility and tangibility, which gives them the ability of ongoing production and materialisation of time and place, of embodying the past.

Archaeological dialogues, 2002

Archaeology is not just about writing reports and interpreting ancient societies and their social structures, but it is also a process which should aim at the creation of a clear communicative message to the general public. Thus, archaeologists should be aware of every possible medium of communication – verbal, written, visual, sound – to express re-constructions of ancient pasts. In this essay I express some ideas about how archaeologists could collaborate with experts, for example theatre directors, in defining artistic way of communicating the past. Finally, I focus on the relationship between academia and fringe archaeology and I look into the political role of archaeologists in modern society.

Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 2008