Beyond grammar

Giorgio Buccellati – April 2026

Introduction

Building on grammar, hermeneutics develops a distinctive approach to archaeological heritage. This entails criteria and methods that go beyond the scope of the grammar.

Here I will only add a few remarks about heritage from the perspective of a grammatical approach.

The heritage maieutics

Heritage is not something we give. It is something that exists but need s to be brought to light. The Socratic image of the midwife who does not generate a child, but helps bringing him or her to light, is particularly apt. It is not only that the archaeologists “unveil” what was entangled in the grip of the soil. They must also articulate the data (“grammaticalize” them) so that they may be truly “knowable.”

I will briefly review the main procedures we have used to achieve this goal with regard to ancient Urkesh.

Conservation. – It is fundamenbtal to have the ancioent built environment protected so that it may be properly visualized. I consider this part of thye publication process and as such it is discussed above and in the dedicate website MCV.
Presentation. MPR The closest to the excavation moment are the two
Commnunity engagement. – MHR, they are treated in detail in a separate website dedicated to heritage – visits to the site lectures in villages
The young people.
The park.

The courage of competence

What we propose, and what we aim to do cocnretely at the site of ancient Urkesh, is to define heritage in terms that are arguably rooted in the record. “Heritage” is not a vague term that implies a simple acknowledgment of a past more or less romanticized – or even not exploited for political reasons. It is rather based on objective data which only the archaeologist can safely bring to the fore.

There is at times, when talking about heritage, a tendency to allow sentiments to prevail over evidence. This requires, as an antidote, that we as archaeologists show the courage of our competence . It is by proposing an objectively restructured and reconfigured record that the ancient perception can properly resonate with us. The record becomes then a diapason that synchronizes our sensitivity with that of the ancients – the proper goal of hermeneutics.

semiotics

hermeneutics

objectivity

Other linguistic models

Since the notion of “grammar” originates with linguistics, in such a way that language remains an excellent model for how this notion may best be applied to archaeology, it is useful to consider how linguistic models for artchaeology extend beyond grammar.

We have already mentioned semiotics, when introducing referentiality and typology, and then again in the section on grammar.

Another pertinent area is that of conversation analysis and of interactional linguistics. We might say that, by looking at language as an actual vehicle of communication, they propose a task similar to that of hermeneutics in archaeology: how does language impact on the social confrontation between speakers? The abundant inventory of letters preserved on cuneiform tablets gives a good example of how interaction may have affected the linguistic domain. But we may also consider the interaction of the inheritors with their “heritage”: it is truly a “conversation,” where we expect the past to be an interlocutor, and not just a dead thing (see a few examples below).

The pride of the past

Letters from the young inheritors. – The Letters from kids, Backdirt article
Identification with the place – music; projecting feelings; MHR
the sound of Hurrian
dating;
naming
iconography in glyptics, figurines