This thesis is one step in defining the parameters of archaeology in an aboriginal context. It is designed to be a practical guide for imagining the past from an internalist perspective because archaeological methods offer the opportunity to represent antiquity that is simultaneously rational and familiar. However, an ancillary objective is to utilize symbols from antiquity as markers of modern Indian identity. / Archaeology appeared on the radar of First Nations because their growing populations demand housing and economic opportunities. Recent settlement of land claims has brought large tracts of land under the control of Native people. Archaeological sites, by their very nature, are defined by their geographical location. Artifacts and sites are the products of past human labour and as such are a unique cultural legacy that must be understood within the context of a generalized world history. Internalist archaeology mediates between a local understanding of antiquity and the ancient history of humanity on a global scale. It is a product of the dialogue that began when the world system intruded on the local experience of aboriginal people. Modern prehistory was accessible only by employing archaeological methods and traditional history, as related in story, was relegated to the margins along with its authors. Myths were discounted as plausible sources of explanation for antiquity as archaeologists constructed their theories to explain the data they accumulated during their excavations. Internalist archaeology is an analytical tool that will play a prominent role in rehabilitating oral narratives by deploying methods to search for the signatures they would leave in the archaeological record. It is also a means to examine folklore so as to discover the messages that are encoded in myths. Myths act as mediating devices which connect the high levels of abstraction, those informing the traditional worldview, with lower levels of abstractions, as represented by customs. Ecological messages are encrypted in narratives which are then transmitted between generations. Each generation must decypher the meaning embedded in a myth to benefit from it. For internalist archaeology, mythology is a reservoir of explanation that has been ignored by mainstream research but which can be the basis for this brand of archaeological research. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

This interdisciplinary thesis is about dwelling, both as a method in archaeology and as a mode of existence. My thesis has two principal aims. Firstly, to explore the 'dwelling perspective' as this has been outlined in recent archaeological theory. This will involve discussion of phenomenological philosophy and the figure of Martin Heidegger. The term 'dwelling' is a technical one originating in Heidegger's philosophy of being. Phenomenology has been making inroads into archaeological theory as a consequence of the interpretive turn of the 1980s. The theoretical commitment of this thesis is that phenomenological inquiry is a useful project in archaeological research. Reflexive archaeological research in the present might articulate and confirm certain phenomenological dimensions of present experience so as to inform and enhance our understanding of the past. Secondly, I discuss the notion of dwelling in the existential sense as a mode of existence in terms that might allow us to deploy this concept in Palaeolithic archaeology, with specific reference to mortuary practice and "art". I propose two case studies in order to explore this. Firstly, mortuary practice and existential awareness of death will be explored with reference to the site of the Sima de los Huesos. Secondly, Heidegger's notion of artistic production as a world-opening event will be explored in relation to Upper Palaeolithic art in caves. The focus on mortuary practice and art is not arbitrary: both are central planks of Heidegger's account of dwelling and both are linked by 'heterotopic' space. Heidegger presented a novel account of human existence as 'Dasein'. Dasein is being-in-the-world and being-in-the-world is unified by what Heidegger called 'care' (Sorge). Heidegger's account of Dasein remains anthropocentric: I argue that we should move away from Heidegger's own anthropocentric view of being-in-the-world, dwelling or care toward a phenomenological archaeology that goes 'beyond the human'. I argue that care or dwelling is evidenced by the archaeological record of human becoming and that our ancestors 'cared for' or 'dwelled with' their dead. Care is evidenced by appropriating the world and by looking after compatriots within the world, and I argue that such an existential state had been reached before the advent of the Upper Palaeolithic. I argue that Upper Palaeolithic "art" opened up a hunter-gatherer world that enabled others, including animal others, and objects, to become meaningful to groups of Daseins, and so to become part of particular "dwelling places". Heidegger remains the key theorist of dwelling but his anthropocentrism should be abandoned. Suitably revised, Heidegger's account of dwelling will provoke us to look at Palaeolithic archaeology from a fresh perspective.

No description available.

This thesis concerns the relationship between research in experimental archaeology and the intangible of the past. Only a quarter of technological experiments in a sample of 100 studies addresses the intangible of technological practice, and this project sets out to explore if there are conceptual or practical obstacles for this low rate. The thesis begins with an in-depth examination of experimental archaeology and the criteria, paradigms and theories that determine its practice. Through this study, elements of the dichotomy positivism/postmodernism are uncovered and discussed. To resolve this dualism, a third paradigm – philosophical pragmatism – is introduced as an alternative. This conceptual debate represents Part I, and is subsequently collated into a methodological framework for the creation of a typified experiment. Part II consists of the experimental segment of this study, in search for practical obstacles for the exploration of the intangible. Through experimenting with Iron Age Bucket-shaped pots, Mesolithic faceted pebbles and Middle Palaeolithic birch bark tar production, different components of an experiment are highlighted for investigation. An element that comes forward as problematic is the relationship between experimental archaeologists and science ideals that is underscored by experimental tradition. Conclusively, the final discussion leaves the conceptual and practical barriers that may prevent archaeologists from studying the intangible aspects of technology overturned. In sum, this may enable experimental archaeologists to take a fuller view of their own practice and that of the people of the past.