Thesis (M.A.)--Texas State University-San Marcos, 2007. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 160-180).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2007. / The entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file. Title from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on October 23, 2007) Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Glasgow, 2003. / Accompanied by CD-ROM. Ph. D. thesis submitted to the Department of Archaeology, University of Glasgow, 2003. Includes bibliographical references. Print version also available.

Thesis (MA. (Archaeology))-University of Pretoria, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 124-139). Available on the Internet via the World Wide Web.

Thesis (M.A.)--Georgia State University, 2005. / Title from title screen. John Kantner, committee chair; Kathryn A. Kozaitis, Emanuela Guano, committee members. Electronic text (112 p. : col. ill.) : digital, PDF file. Description based on contents viewed June 11, 2007. Includes bibliographical references (p. 106-112).

No description available.

Esta dissertação trata da ação educativa no âmbito do Projeto Arqueologia Histórica Missioneira, desenvolvido em cooperação técnica entre o IPHAN e universidades gaúchas entre os anos 1985 e 1995, sob a coordenação do Professor Arno Alvarez Kern. Para conduzir a análise do tema, a dissertação inicia com uma leitura sobre o processo de incorporação das ruínas missioneiras em território brasileiro, ao patrimônio e à memória nacional. Em seguida, é colocada a problemática do surgimento da arqueologia histórica no Brasil e a relação que esta tem com o desenvolvimento dos dispositivos legais de preservação e das políticas para o patrimônio arqueológico emanadas do IPHAN. Assim referenciado, a terceira parte do trabalho consiste em perseguir as condições em que foram realizadas as ações educativas no Projeto Arqueologia Histórica Missioneira, bem como demonstrar o sentido que essas ações adquiriram ao longo de sua realização. / This dissertation deals with the educational activities under “Arqueologia Histórica Missioneira” project, developed in technical cooperation by IPHAN and Rio Grande do Sul’s universities between 1985 and 1995, under scholar Arno Alvarez Kern coordination. To conduct the analysis of the topic, the dissertation begins with a reading about the incorporation process of Missions ruins into Brazilian national heritage and memory. After that we present the question regarding the rise of Historical Archeology in Brazil and its relations with the laws for preservation and policies by IPHAN’s archaeological heritage. Finally we present the conditions under which educational actions of “Arqueologia Histórica Missioneira” project were performed and show off the meaning that these actions have acquired throughout their achievement.

Esta dissertação trata da ação educativa no âmbito do Projeto Arqueologia Histórica Missioneira, desenvolvido em cooperação técnica entre o IPHAN e universidades gaúchas entre os anos 1985 e 1995, sob a coordenação do Professor Arno Alvarez Kern. Para conduzir a análise do tema, a dissertação inicia com uma leitura sobre o processo de incorporação das ruínas missioneiras em território brasileiro, ao patrimônio e à memória nacional. Em seguida, é colocada a problemática do surgimento da arqueologia histórica no Brasil e a relação que esta tem com o desenvolvimento dos dispositivos legais de preservação e das políticas para o patrimônio arqueológico emanadas do IPHAN. Assim referenciado, a terceira parte do trabalho consiste em perseguir as condições em que foram realizadas as ações educativas no Projeto Arqueologia Histórica Missioneira, bem como demonstrar o sentido que essas ações adquiriram ao longo de sua realização. / This dissertation deals with the educational activities under “Arqueologia Histórica Missioneira” project, developed in technical cooperation by IPHAN and Rio Grande do Sul’s universities between 1985 and 1995, under scholar Arno Alvarez Kern coordination. To conduct the analysis of the topic, the dissertation begins with a reading about the incorporation process of Missions ruins into Brazilian national heritage and memory. After that we present the question regarding the rise of Historical Archeology in Brazil and its relations with the laws for preservation and policies by IPHAN’s archaeological heritage. Finally we present the conditions under which educational actions of “Arqueologia Histórica Missioneira” project were performed and show off the meaning that these actions have acquired throughout their achievement.

L’objectif de ma thèse est de proposer une étude approfondie d’un domaine qui, s’il est régulièrement employé pour la vulgarisation de l’Archéologie et de l’Histoire, n’a jamais fait jusqu’à présent à notre connaissance l’objet d’une étude spécifique. La restitution archéologique et historique est pourtant un phénomène qui, en particulier dans les pays anglo-Saxons et nordiques, joue un rôle-Clé à la fois dans la recherche scientifique et dans la diffusion du patrimoine auprès du grand-Public. Des articles et des ouvrages qui s’intéressent à telle ou telle méthode de restitution sont fréquemment publiés en France. Ce travail de recherche se développe en trois parties : la première est consacrée à une Histoire de la restitution et des représentations du passé, à travers l’espace et le temps. De l’Antiquité à aujourd’hui, nous étudierons ainsi l’évolution des mises en scène et des mises en images des évènements, édifices et figures marquantes de l’Histoire, de même que des valeurs et des interdits rattachés à ces représentations du passé. Donner une image, réaliste ou symbolique, du passé et ne pas seulement l’évoquer par la parole ou par l’écrit, est un désir qui semble avoir été présent chez les hommes à toutes les époques et dans toutes les civilisations. Miroir des époques qui les ont créées et de la perception qu’ont les hommes de leur société et de celles qui les ont précédés, les restitutions historiques et archéologiques anciennes sont des témoignages importants. La seconde partie repose sur l’analyse de trois exemples de restitutions archéologiques et historiques réalisées en France et sur des sites européens. Ils ont été choisis pour leur caractère paradigmatique et leurs places respectives dans l’avancée des techniques et des attentes des scientifiques comme du public destiné à les regarder. Enfin, la troisième et dernière partie va au cœur du sujet et, en particulier, à partir des exemples analysés précédemment, propose une interrogation sur les limites et les enjeux de la restitution archéologique et historique. Cette mise en question revêt une particulière actualité à la fin du XXème et au début du XXIème siècle. Cela pour trois raisons : le développement du tourisme culturel et le développement des parcs archéologiques interactifs, l’amplification des politiques du patrimoine, l’accroissement d’un public formé à la lecture de l’image qui n’attend plus seulement du chercheur le résultat d’une hypothèse mais aussi sa justification. Les enjeux de la restitution sont donc cruciaux. Un signe en est que de plus en plus de thèses d’archéologie sur des études de sites proposent des restitutions. Les autorités archéologiques de nombreux pays stipulent désormais qu’une part conséquente du budget de la fouille doit être consacrée à la valorisation postérieure, au centre de laquelle se trouve la restitution. Cette dernière sort donc du cadre strict de la muséographie et s’impose désormais à des acteurs très divers, qui n’ont été que superficiellement intéressés à ces problématiques. L’explosion du recours à la restitution apparaît comme un triomphe ambigu. En effet, les divers acteurs qui utilisent la restitution ne poursuivent pas les mêmes buts : entre ceux qui expérimentent une hypothèse de travail et ceux qui attendent un support pédagogique pour instruire, voire ceux qui recherchent une image destinée à susciter l’investissement sentimental du lieu, le dénominateur commun est très difficile, voire impossible, à trouver. En outre une des limites majeures des restitutions archéologiques et historiques réside principalement dans à leur caractère éphémère de leur validité scientifique, alors que leur durée de vie est parfois très longue. Une historiographie de ces réalisations est nécessaire en ce qu’elles reflètent au moins autant leur contexte de construction que l’époque qu’elles sont supposées faire revivre. / The aim of my thesis was to offer a detailed study of an area which, if regularly used for the extension of Archaeology and History, has never been so far the subject of a specific study, according to our knowledge. Archaeological and historical reconstruction is nevertheless a phenomenon, especially in the Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian countries, that plays a key role in both scientific research and release of heritage to the general public. Articles and books that are interested in this or that method of reconstruction are frequently published in France.This research work is divided in three parts: the first one is devoted to a historic of reconstruction and representations of the past, through space and time. From antiquity to today, we will study the evolution of staging and set images on events, buildings and figures in history, as well as values and taboos associated to these representations of the past. Give a picture, realistic or symbolic of the past and not only allude to it by spoken or written means, is a desire that seems to have been present among men in all ages and in all civilizations. Mirrors of the eras that created them and perceptions of the men of their own society and those who preceded them, ancient historical and archaeological reconstructions are important testimony. The second part is based on the analysis of three examples of archaeological and historical representation made in France and on European sites. They were chosen for their paradigm and their respective places in the advanced techniques and expectations of scientists as well as the public supposed to watch them. The third and last part goes to the heart of the subject and, in particular, from the examples discussed above, offers an interrogation upon the limits and the challenges of archaeological and historical reconstructions. This issue is particularly topical in the late twentieth and early twenty-First century. For three reasons: the development of cultural tourism and the development of interactive archaeological parks, the amplification of heritage policies, the increase in the public educated in image reading which is waiting not only for the researcher’s result of a hypothesis but also its justification. So the reconstruction issues are crucial. A sign of it is that more and more doctoral thesis of archeological sites offers reconstructions. The archaeological authorities of many countries now stipulate that a significant proportion of the budget of the search must be devoted to subsequent promotion, of which the center is reconstruction. The latter therefore falls outside the strict framework of museums and now requires a variety of actors who were only superficially interested in these issues. The explosion in use of reconstructions appears as an ambiguous triumph. Indeed, the various actors who use the reconstruction are not aiming the same goals: between those who experience a working hypothesis and those who are expecting pedagogical resource as teaching tools, or those looking for an image to generate a sentimental investment of a place, the common denominator is very difficult, if not impossible, to find. In addition, a major limitation of archaeological and historical reconstructions lies mainly in the ephemeral nature of their scientific validity, even if their life is sometimes very long. An historiography of these achievements is necessary, because they reflect the context of their building as much as the era they are supposed to bring back to life.

Decorative, polychrome ceramics from Corinth, Greece, produced during the 8th-6th centuries B.C.E. are luxury goods that were widely traded throughout Greece and the Mediterranean. The decorated ceramics were produced in a variety of shapes, including aryballos, alabastron, and olpe. They were decorated with slip-glazes in distinctive white, black, red, yellow, and purple colors, and in a variety of surface finishes, matte, semi-matte and glossy. Artisans in Corinthian workshops experimented to change the colors of the slips by varying the type and amount of iron-rich raw materials. They also varied the composition of the clay used as a binder and the amount of flux used as a sintering aid to promote glass formation. This research reconstructs the technology used by the Corinthian craftsmen to produce the Archaic polychrome ceramics, and shows how these technologies differed from the production of better known, more prestigious Athenian black-figure and red-figure ceramics. Through microstructural examination of archaeological samples and replication experiments, this thesis proposes that the purple iron oxide pigment is the result of acid treatment and oxidation of iron metal. The firing temperature range of the Corinthian polychrome ceramics was determined experimentally to be 925-1025° C, which is higher than previously reported and similar to that reported for Corinthian transport amphoras. The firing range is higher by 50-150° C than the Athenian black-figure and red-figure ceramics. Samples of Corinthian polychrome and Athenian black-figure ceramics from the Marie Farnsworth collection at the University of Arizona were tested and compared to Corinthian clay collections. Analytical techniques included Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), scanning-electron microscopy with energy-dispersive spectroscopy (SEM-EDS), micro-Raman spectroscopy, and wavelength-dispersive electron microprobe (EPMA with BSE-SEM).