A Grammar of the Archaeological Record (Version 2, Beta release)

Introduction

Preface

Giorgio Buccellati – June 2010, July 2024

For full bibliographical information see Front Matter.

complex, but coherent and applciable – continuity

The concept of a grammar entails more than a set of rules. It proposes a coherent and tightly knit organism, capable of accounting for the most minute of details while a the same time viewing the whole in its structural complexity. The linguistic model operates with a living organism, even with the so-called “dead” languages: Babylonian has not been spoken for more than two millennia, but it is a living organism to the extent that we can retrieve it from the available texts.

The archaeological record, unlike a language, is not so organic. It is vast congeries of disaggregated data. But for few exceptions, the constituents as found are not the constituents as operative. Hence their grammar must go through two intermediate steps, one that defines the “things” as found, the other that defines them in terms of their orignal function and thus re-aggregates them into wholeness. It is, we might say, a grammar at the power of two.

The quality of a grammar is judged in part by its “power,” i. e., the effectiveness with which it can, on the one hand, account for the data and, on the other, generate an appropriate output. In the case of a linguistic grammar, this refers to a mutually understandable oral communication. In our context, this refers to how the totality of the data as found can be accounted for, in the first place, and then to how the data can be recomposed into unity. There are, therefore, two concomitant aspects, which correspond to the double nature of an archaeological grammar.

The actual process whereby the output is generated from the data on the basis of the Grammar is omitted here. It represents an altogether different exercise, requiring as it does the application of specific input protocols and the running of a set of programs. The development of these protocols and the writing of the programs has occupied much of my effort, alongside the development of the theoretical framework embodied in the Grammar and alongside the field work which generated the data. These protocols are described in detail in the Digital Operations Manual.

Back to top: Preface