CRITICISM OF THE RELIABILITY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATING OF CULTURAL ARTIFACTS

A. Soshnikov
{"title":"CRITICISM OF THE RELIABILITY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATING OF CULTURAL ARTIFACTS","authors":"A. Soshnikov","doi":"10.17721/ucs.2020.2(7).10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of the article is to join the discussion about the degree of reliability of archaeological dating of cultural artifacts. Research methodology of the article: the main methods of archaeological dating of cultural artifacts are analyzed. The following conclusions are presented in the article: the concept of \"archaeological source\" is one of the basic categories of archeology, which largely determines the empirical activity of a scientist. In the domestic science, the term still does not have a unified understanding, as, indeed, most categories theoretical level. Perhaps the only one an indisputable point in the definition of the term is what archaeological sources are both material remains and observations of the researcher during field and chamber work. In the course of the study, it was concluded that archeology is not capable of either confirming or refuting the traditional chronological scheme, since it is impossible to date objects of material culture without relying on written records. The only thing that archaeological methods can give so far is the establishment of the relative sequence of layers and cultures. But between these results and the absolute age of these layers, there is a gap that has been filled so far based on the traditional grid. Generalization of the main methods of archaeological dating of cultural artifacts represents the novelty of the article. The practical significance of the article is the correction of the existing methods of archaeological dating of cultural artifacts. Archeology is neither able to confirm nor refute the traditional chronological scheme, because the objects of material culture cannot be dated without relying on written records. When, it would seem, it is possible to date an architectural structure absolutely reliably, the obtained result contradicts traditional ideas. The only thing that archaeological methods can give so far is to establish the relative sequence of layers and cultures. But between these results and the absolute age of these layers – a whole gap, which is still filled, based on the traditional grid.","PeriodicalId":52653,"journal":{"name":"Ukrayins''ki kul''turologichni studiyi","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ukrayins''ki kul''turologichni studiyi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17721/ucs.2020.2(7).10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to join the discussion about the degree of reliability of archaeological dating of cultural artifacts. Research methodology of the article: the main methods of archaeological dating of cultural artifacts are analyzed. The following conclusions are presented in the article: the concept of "archaeological source" is one of the basic categories of archeology, which largely determines the empirical activity of a scientist. In the domestic science, the term still does not have a unified understanding, as, indeed, most categories theoretical level. Perhaps the only one an indisputable point in the definition of the term is what archaeological sources are both material remains and observations of the researcher during field and chamber work. In the course of the study, it was concluded that archeology is not capable of either confirming or refuting the traditional chronological scheme, since it is impossible to date objects of material culture without relying on written records. The only thing that archaeological methods can give so far is the establishment of the relative sequence of layers and cultures. But between these results and the absolute age of these layers, there is a gap that has been filled so far based on the traditional grid. Generalization of the main methods of archaeological dating of cultural artifacts represents the novelty of the article. The practical significance of the article is the correction of the existing methods of archaeological dating of cultural artifacts. Archeology is neither able to confirm nor refute the traditional chronological scheme, because the objects of material culture cannot be dated without relying on written records. When, it would seem, it is possible to date an architectural structure absolutely reliably, the obtained result contradicts traditional ideas. The only thing that archaeological methods can give so far is to establish the relative sequence of layers and cultures. But between these results and the absolute age of these layers – a whole gap, which is still filled, based on the traditional grid.
对文物考古年代可靠性的批评
这篇文章的目的是加入关于文物考古年代可靠性的讨论。本文的研究方法:分析了文物考古年代测定的主要方法。本文得出以下结论:“考古来源”概念是考古学的基本范畴之一,它在很大程度上决定了科学家的经验活动。在国内科学中,对该术语仍没有一个统一的认识,实际上大部分范畴都停留在理论层面。也许在这个术语的定义中,唯一一个无可争议的点是考古来源是什么,既包括材料遗骸,也包括研究人员在野外和室内工作期间的观察。在研究过程中,得出的结论是,考古学既不能证实也不能反驳传统的年代计划,因为不依靠书面记录就不可能确定物质文化对象的年代。迄今为止,考古方法所能提供的唯一东西就是建立地层和文化的相对顺序。但是,在这些结果和这些地层的绝对年龄之间,有一个空白,迄今为止,基于传统网格已经填补了这个空白。对文物考古年代测定的主要方法进行了概括,体现了本文的新颖性。本文的现实意义在于对现有文物考古年代测定方法的修正。考古学既不能证实也不能反驳传统的年代计划,因为物质文化的对象不能在没有书面记录的情况下确定年代。当可以绝对可靠地确定建筑结构的年代时,得到的结果似乎与传统观念相矛盾。迄今为止,考古学方法所能提供的唯一东西就是确定地层和文化的相对顺序。但在这些结果和这些层的绝对年龄之间——一个完整的差距,仍然被填补,基于传统的网格。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信