|
Seeing the Past/Reading the PastKeywords: Archaelogy , artefact , evidence , Greece , museum studies , reading Abstract: : Speaking of what he calls the "uneasy dialogue" between ancient historians and Classical archaeologists, Ray Laurence notes the absence of "a theory of representation of the material world in language." And he suggests that the cause of this uneasiness is a poor understanding of "the role of material objects in texts.” It may be going too far to suggest that this unease is due to the fact that inanimate objects and physical structures in texts necessarily refer to the temporal limits of human life. Nonetheless, such a theory must be based first of all on an understanding of their temporal effects; in disciplinary terms, it must establish the criteria by which physical objects and features become sources of historical ‘evidence’ or archaeological ‘artefacts’. How do we respond to the claim in a recent (2007) article in Brill's New Pauly Online, for example, that archaeological artefacts are "tangible evidence for the past" (Hauser 1, “haptisches Zeugnis der Vergangenheit”)? While this claim may seem hopelessly naive, it has a history that can be traced to the anecdotal effects of physical objects described in ancient Greek narrative (cf. Fineman). Utilisding work in museum studies, thing theory, phenomenology, and the history of disciplines, this article brings this history into contact with contemporary archaeological theory and, more specifically, with the metaphor of ‘reading’ the past in its material remains. The question posed here is how objects within narrative prefigure “the potential for narrative within the artefact.” Resumé: Dans son commentaire sur le "dialogue difficile" entre historiens de l'antiquité et archéologues traditionnels, Ray Laurence fait remarquer l'absence partagée d'une "théorie de la représentation verbale du monde matériel". Il en conclut que la cause de ce manque de dialogue pourrait être une mauvaise compréhension du r le des objets matériels dans le texte. Il est sans doute exagéré de penser que la difficulté en question est due au fait que tant les objets inanimés que les structures matérielles représentées dans un texte renvoient inévitablement aux limites temporelles de l'existence humaine. Pourtant, il serait bon qu'une telle théorie soit basée en premier lieu sur une meilleure compréhension de leurs effets temporels. Dit de manière plus disciplinaire: une telle théorie doit établir les critères qui permettent de transformer des objets ou des aspects matériels de devenir des sources de "preuve" historique ou des "artefacts" archéologiques. Comment réagir par exemple à l'idée défendue dans un article récent (2007) d
|