Every sherd is sacred: Compulsive hoarding in archaeology
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › peer-review
Standard Standard
Managing the Archaeological Heritage: Public archaeology in Europe. ed. / Ghattas J. Sayej; Donald Henson; Yvonne F. Williumsen. Kristiansand: Vest-Agder-Museet, 2015. p. 24-37 3.
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › peer-review
HarvardHarvard
APA
CBE
MLA
VancouverVancouver
Author
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - Every sherd is sacred
T2 - Compulsive hoarding in archaeology
AU - Karl, Raimund
PY - 2015/12/15
Y1 - 2015/12/15
N2 - Since the beginnings of our subject in German countries in the late 19th century, a mostly unreflected, firmly positivist epistemology has been the foundation of our practice. Established by ‘fathers’ of modern archaeology like Virchow and Hoernes, we believe that “...beginning and progress...” in archaeology lie in “... the observation of plain fact, in the stringing together of individual, of themselves unremarkable observations to incontrovertible knowledge...” (Hoernes 1892, 43). Virchow (quoted in Hoernes 1892, 70) hoped that the anthropological disciplines would progress “...by purely inductive means...” in the future. One of the necessary (epistemo-)logical preconditions for the possibility to arrive at proof positive by inductive reasoning is the completeness of observations. And since it has become disciplinary dogma that only inductive reasoning based on correct and complete observations of archaeology can create reliable, i.e. ‘true’, knowledge about archaeological things (and people), a particular relationship of the discipline with these things necessarily follows: every archaeological object is an infinitely valuable treasure, is sacrosanct, must be conserved forever. Only this can guarantee that our observations remain repeatable and thus allow our discipline to progress by no other than inductive means. Industrial hoarding thus is a necessary consequence of our epistemological approach.
AB - Since the beginnings of our subject in German countries in the late 19th century, a mostly unreflected, firmly positivist epistemology has been the foundation of our practice. Established by ‘fathers’ of modern archaeology like Virchow and Hoernes, we believe that “...beginning and progress...” in archaeology lie in “... the observation of plain fact, in the stringing together of individual, of themselves unremarkable observations to incontrovertible knowledge...” (Hoernes 1892, 43). Virchow (quoted in Hoernes 1892, 70) hoped that the anthropological disciplines would progress “...by purely inductive means...” in the future. One of the necessary (epistemo-)logical preconditions for the possibility to arrive at proof positive by inductive reasoning is the completeness of observations. And since it has become disciplinary dogma that only inductive reasoning based on correct and complete observations of archaeology can create reliable, i.e. ‘true’, knowledge about archaeological things (and people), a particular relationship of the discipline with these things necessarily follows: every archaeological object is an infinitely valuable treasure, is sacrosanct, must be conserved forever. Only this can guarantee that our observations remain repeatable and thus allow our discipline to progress by no other than inductive means. Industrial hoarding thus is a necessary consequence of our epistemological approach.
KW - German archaeology
KW - positivism
KW - professional archaeological collections
KW - hoarding disorder
M3 - Chapter
SN - 9788291178318
SP - 24
EP - 37
BT - Managing the Archaeological Heritage
A2 - Sayej, Ghattas J.
A2 - Henson, Donald
A2 - Williumsen, Yvonne F.
PB - Vest-Agder-Museet
CY - Kristiansand
ER -