Keramik = Kultur? – Das Problem der Kulturdefinition in der euroamerikanischen und der chinesischen Archäologie
The term “culture“ is ubiquitous in archaeological research and publications but its meaning has long been highly contested. While at the beginning of the 20th century archaeological cultures were directly equated with ethnic groups, this culture concept soon became criticized as racist and methodol...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Book section |
| Published: |
Harrasowitz
2019
|
| Summary: | The term “culture“ is ubiquitous in archaeological research and publications but its meaning has long been highly contested. While at the beginning of the 20th century archaeological cultures were directly equated with ethnic groups, this culture concept soon became criticized as racist and methodologically problematic. Although it is by now generally acknowledged that the relationship between material culture and identity groups is a complex one, in practice ceramic complexes are often equated with culture units and all related archaeological material is labeled accordingly. In modern-day China where prehistoric chronological frameworks are still contested in many places, the focus is on ceramic assemblages that are usually equated with archaeological cultures named after the site where the ceramic types in question were first discovered. This paper explores the reasons for this ongoing dilemma in both western and Chinese research, focusing on the embeddedness of the archaeologists in both regions in old research traditions and modern conditions of archaeological work. It also suggests a few tentative avenues for resolving some of these issues in future research. |
|---|