2012-01-08 lecture by Mr. Ranjith Bandara

1. Postgraduate Diploma Program 2011 – 2012
Postgraduate Institute of Archaeology
Lecture 8
Ways of Knowing and Narrating the
Past
Ranjith Bandara Dissanayake

2. mqrdúoHd;aul ióCIKfha úêl%u
(Archaeological Survey Methods)
* foaYk jHqyh
1. .fõIKh: Ndú;h yd úêl%u
2. u;=msg .fõIK l%u
3. N+ fN!;sl .fõIK l%u
4. oqria: ixfõoS .fõIK l%u

3. bf.kq ï M,
* mqrdúoHdfõ fCIa;% Ndú;dj
* mqrdúoHdfõ nyqúIhSh m%fõYh
* mqrdúoHd ióCIK i|yd fhdod .kakd úêl%u

4. What is
Space ?

5. Cont..
Three modes of spatial thinking:
1. Perceived space (suppose)
2. Conceived space (imagine)
3. lived space
(“therdspace” as a place of transition between built and cognitive
realities, a place in everyday life where conceptions of space are
transformed.)

6. Cont..
Concept of Place;
..like a concept of space, is fundamental to
understanding
Human society.
Place is both physical location of activity (the space where
human
and the historically contextualized
Action occur),
construction and reconstruction of conceptions of that
place.
Place is not a predetermined entity, rather place is
porous,
Dynamic, and unstable yet resilient (flexible).

7. Space in Archaeology
•Archaeologists focused on trying to make sense of the artifacts and
features they uncovered.
•By examining the characteristics of assemblages it became
apparent that some shared certain traits and that these traits
could be attributed to individual cultures.
•Reasoning that different cultures represented different ethnic
groups, and that the characteristics of these groups could be
understood through their material culture.
•These cultures influenced one another and that certain styles
moved from one society to another through diffusion, migration or
invasion.
• Spatial distribution of these “culture traits” was essential to
understanding change.
•Classifying assemblages into groups with a discrete spatial extent;
called “culture areas”.

8. Cont..
“…the study of past distribution of culture-traits
in time and space, and the factors governing
their distribution.”
(Clarke, D.L., 1977, Spatial Archaeology)
“After an artifacts has been exposed, its position
must be recorded. This information is as
significant as the artifact itself.”
( Robert Heizer, 1958

9. Spatial Patterns
•Notion of “site”.
- defined as a complex relational framework in
which
social action and natural processes are related in
a complex, dynamic and dialectical sense.
- An archaeological site is the place where social
action “was” performed.
- Social action is never performed isolated or in an
abstract vacuum.
- Social action is produced in physical space, and
this is not a neutral container.

10. Cont…
- Archaeological site is not a random organized, nor it is
result of chance alone.
-Changes in the topology of archaeological space
determine changes in the statistical properties of the
archaeological records.
Three modes of arch; context,
a) Locus
b) Site
c) Settlement

11. SETTLEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY AND
SPATIAL ANALYSIS
In any inquiry about the social past, the
first question to address is size or scale.
Settlement archaeology includes an array
of techniques and theories dedicated
precisely to understanding these scalar
questions.
Archaeologists generally try to address
spatial concerns first in the process of
decoding past human behavior.

12. Investigating activities within
a site
• the aim is to understand the nature
of the activities that took place there,
and of the social group that used it.
• One important distinction can be
drawn between cave sites and open
sites.
• Ethnoarchaeology – linking the
ethnographic present with the
archaeological past.

13. Investigating territories in mobile
societies
• Off-site archaeology – how do people
use the territory between sites?
Sampling strategy to determine
density of stone tools over large
area. Space and density are the two
critical factors examined.

14. SETTLEMENT
PATTERNING
Possible site categories include
(ascending scale):
• hamlet
• dispersed village
• nucleated village
• local center
• regional center

15. A site
hierarchy in
Mesoamerica
. (a)
Simplified
hierarchy of
site types.
(b)
Hypothetical
site
hierarchy on
the ground,
with the
major
regional
center
serving
secondary
centers
spaced at
regular
intervals.
These in turn

16. Central
Place Theory
(Walter
Christaller,
1933).
• Basic tenet:
In a uniform
landscape,
the spatial
patterning of
settlements
would be
perfectly
regular,
forming
interconnectin
g hexagons.

18. Site Hierarchies
• Sites are organized in rank order by
size.
• These are but two of many
potential models for explaining the
distribution of human settlements
across given landscapes…

19. How do we bridge the gap
between archaeological
remains and the societies
those remains represent?
The two most commonly proposed
approaches are:
• middle range theory
• analogy

25. (Somadeva 2005).

26. Central Place Theory
This is theory concerned with the
functional importance of places

27. Central Place
• -is a settlement that provides goods &
services. It can be small (a village) or
large (primate city)
 all settlements form a link in a
hierarchy London 7m
Peterborough
156,000
Norwich 122,000
Cambridge
108,000

28. Why are there very few
large settlements?

29. Settlement hierarchy
• Why are there very few large settlements?
• Large settlements need a very large population
(threshold) to support all of their functions
(services)
• Large settlements provide very high order
functions (Great Ormond St, Houses of
Parliament). Because these functions are so
highly specialised there is not enough
demand to support more than a few of them

30. u;= m s g .fõIK úêl% u ^Surface survey&
fuys l%ufõo folls. tkï,
1 wl%uj;a ióCIK ^unsystematic survey&
fuh b;d ir, jQjls. .fõIlhdf.a wNsu;h mrsos fCIq;%fha ksoyfia
weúÈñka, wod< o%jH tla/ia lrñka, u;=msg lsishï boslsrSula fõ kï
tajd w;r we;s iïnJO;dj jd¾;d .; lrhs.
fuu l%uh,
mCImd;S yd fkdu. hjk iq¨ wra:ksrEmK ,nd fohs.
2 l%uj;a ióCIK ^systematic survey&
.fjsIKhg ,la lrk N+ñh ukdj md,kh l< yels mrsos is;shul
Wml,ams; fldgqoe,a fhdod l%udkql+, wdldrhg wejso ^field walking&
iuSCIKh flfra. N+ñfha lsisoq fldgila fj; wju wjOdkhla fyda
Wmrsu wjOdkhla fhduq fkdflfra. ksheoslrKfha Wmrsu ksrjoH;dj
ms<sn| ie<ls,su;a fõ.

31. l%uj;a fCIa;% iuSCIKhl idCIs:
1 flaJo%dmidrS úysoSu
2 úYd, m%foaYhla Wml,ams;
fldgqoe,lg we;=<;a fldg
iuSCIKh lsrSu
mqrdúoHd mYapd;a Wmdê wdh;kh u.ska 1999 -
2001 w;r ld,h ;=< isoql< lsrs|sTh my<
ksuskfha mqrdK ckdjdi iuSCIKh

32. u ;= m s g ióCIKfhys Ndú;dj
* mq¨,a ióCIK ^extensive survey& yd ;Sj%
ióCIK ^intensive survey&
fuh l%u folla hgf;a jsia;r l< yel tkus
1 m%dfoaYSh ióCIK ^regional survey&
jsYd, m%foaYhla fyd l,dmhla f;dard
f.k mq¨,a f,i;a ;Sj% f,i;a iuSCIKh
lsrSuhs
2 ia:dkSh ióCIK ^site survey&
ksYaÑ; l=vd wjldYhla f;dard f.k mq¨,a
f,i;a ;Sj% f,i;a iuSCIKh lsrSuhs

33. The
exploration
was
conducted
within an
area of
300km2. This
area was
divided into
1.6x1.6km
squares. The
extent of the
reachable
area in LKB
is about
164km2. The
un-reachable
area (66km2)
consists of
mountains, a
restricted
wildlife
sanctuary
(Yāla) and lsrs|sTh my< ksuskfha jra. lsf,dauSgr 300 l m%dfoaYSh .fjsIKh
several man-
made

34. N+ fN!;s l .fõIK úêl% u ^geo-physical survey&
* mqrdúoHdfõ nyqúIhd;aul m%fõYh
fuu l%ufhaoS jvd;a Wmfhda.S lr .kq ,nkafka N+úoHdj jsiska N+
wNHka;rh iuSCIKh i|yd oshqKq lrk ,o ;dCIKsl l%ufjsohkah.
fmdf<dj wNHka;rh fidhd ne,Su ^subsurface detection&
1 fmdf<dj jsoSu ^Probes/coring method&
f,day oKavla wdOdrfhka fyda fndarh ^Bores& Wmldr lr f.k fmdf<dj
jso mia mrSCId lsrSu u.ska fmdf<dj wNHka;rh iuSCIKh lsrSu. fuys l%u
folls. tkus,
w& w;a Ts.rh ^Hand Auger&
wd& hdka;%sl TS.rh ^Mechanical Auger&

36. fmdf<dj jso ne,Sfus jHdmD;sh - 2001 rusnd jsydr jHdmD;sh weUs,smsgsh ^Ramba Vihara Coring Project - 2001&

37. 2 tkafvdiafldam iuSCIKh ^Endoscope&
* 1950 oYlfha jraOkh jQjls
* ldraf,d f,rsps ^Carlo Lerici& jsiska oshqKq lrk ,oaols
* fmdf<dj wNHka;rfha jk isoqre ;=<ska l=vd wOs;dCIKsl leurdjla hjd
iuSCIKh lsrSu
* Bcsma;=fjs msruSv fuu l%uh hgf;a mrSCId fldg we;
* tgsg%ialka fidfydka N+us 3500 la muK mrSCId fldg tajd ish,a, ysia nj wjfndaO
lr .kakd ,os
pq u s N l .fjs I K l% u ^Magnetic survey&
Ndjs;h - je<,S we;s ms<siaiQ ueá jHqyhka j<x fmdarKq hlv NdKav j<j,a yd w.,a
wkdjrKh lrhs
uQ,Orauh - by; je<,S .sh wx. u.ska uek .; yels wkaofus N+ pqusNl fCIa;%
jHdl+,;d ^distortions in the earth’s magnetic field& fmkakqus lrhs.
pqusNl fCIa;%j, fjkialus je<,S we;s o%jH wkqj fjkia fjs jsfYaIfhka hlvj,
iusnJO;dj wkqj th r|d mj;S fuu ixfjsoS;dj i|yd b;d l=vd hlv m%udkhla
;snSu jqjo m%udKj;ah.
uegsj, we;s hlv Tlaihsv wxY=j, pqusNlFjh tu uegs fkdmqˆiaik;dla wjsOsu;a
f,i osYdkq.; fjs. tfy;a tu uegs fi,aishia wxYl 700 g fyda Bg jevsfhka r;a
lsrSfusoS tajdfha hlv wxY= ia:sr f,i fmdf<dfjs pqusNl fCIa;% wkqj osYd .;jS
ia:djr fjs.

38. pqusNl fCIq;%j, wksis m%;sl%shd ukskq ,nk, tu.ska je<,S we;s wx. wkdjrKh lr .ekSu i|yd Ndjs;
lrkq ,nk l%ufjso ;=kls. tkus,
w& ue.fkdauSgrh ^magnetometers&
wd& f.%vsfhdauSgrh ^gradiometers&
we& f,day mrSCIlh ^metal detectors&
ue.a f kda u S g r
fmdf<dfjs we;s lrkq ,nk b;d iq¨ tfy;a ;shqKq pqusNl fCIa;% ;Sj%;d fjkialus .%yKh
l< yel
1 fm%dafgdak ue.afkdauSgrh ^proton precession magnometer&
^jsoq,s o.rhla wka;ra.; lrk ,o c,h msrjQ fnda;,hlska hqla; fjs th l%shdldrS jkafka ixfjsolhla
f,ih fuu ixfjsolh rsgl ijs fldg we;s w;r wf;a f.k hd yels wkaofus fmgsgshl jQ bf,lafg%daksl
mrsm:hlg th flan,a u.ska iusnJO fldg we;&
2 *a,laiaf.ags ue.afkdauSgrh ^Fluxgate Magnometer&
3 vs*rkaI,a *a,laiaf.ags ue.afkdauSgrh ^Differential Fluxgate magnometer&

40. f.%vsfhdauSgr
1 *a,laiaf.ags f.%vsfhda uSgrh ^Fluxgate Gradiometer&
fuh wdf,dal m%Njhla wka;ra.; jQjls tu.ska fmdf<dfjs pqusNl fCIa;
%j, ;Sj%;dfjs fjki wLKavj uek fohs
fuh iajhxl%s%h Pdhd jdra;dlrKhlg yd mrs.Klhlg iusnJO l< yel
f,day mrSCIl
fus u.ska pqusNlFjh ^magnetism& yd ikakdhl;dj^conductivity&
hk .=Kdx. folu Ndjs; lrkq ,nhs th ishˆu f,day jra.j, jsoHq;a
ikakdhl;dj yd hlv wvx.= f,dayj, by, pqusNl ku%;djg m%;spdr
olajhs
1 mdxY= ikakdhl;d udklh ^soil conductivity meter&
2 iamkaok wd.uk udklh ^pulsed induction meter&
fuu WmlrK u.ska fmdf<dj fj;g iusfm%aIKh lrkq ,nk ;rx.j,
fjkila we;s lrk mfia we;s ikakdhl;dj fyda ku%;dj u.ska fmdf<dj
wNHka;rfha je<,S we;s o%jH ms<sn|j fkdj jHqy ms<sn|j wkdjrKh fjs

42. oq r ia : ixfõoS ióCIK úêl% u ^remote sensing
methods&
fmdf<dj jso ne,Sulska fyda leKSulska fyda f;drj ydksodhl fkdjk
wdldrfha fmdf<dj wNHka;rh mrSCId lsrSfus l%u jkafka oqria: ixfjsoS
iuSCIK l%uhkah
oqria: ixfjsoS WmlrK jsjsO Yla;Ska uqod yer mia jsksjso f.dia fmdf<dj
hg je<,s we;s o%jH yd jHqyhka ms<n|j ms<sUsnqjla ,nd fokafka
fmdf<dfjs we;s pqusNl fCIa;%j, ;Sj%;djg ixfjsoS fjusks
1 .=jka PdhdrEm ^Arial Photographs&
;sria .=jka PdhdrEm ^oblique Arial
photographs&
isria .=jka PdhdrEm ^vertical Arial
photographs&

43. frdaudkq n,fldgqjla .=jka PdhdrEmhlg osia jk whqre

47. 2 pJo%sld PdhdrEm ^Landsat Satellite Images&

50. Spot 7 kus jQ m%xYhg wh;a
Landsat
pJo%sldj jsiska 2002 jifraoS .kakd
,o lsrs|sTh my, ksuskh yd wjg

51. Spot 7 Landsat pJo%sldfjka .kakd ,o
PdhdrEmhlska osia jk mshjs weig
fkdfmfkk hd, m%foaYfha mqrdK l=Uqre
hdhl m%;sksraudKhla

52. 3 iSiausla yd Osjks ;rx. ^Seismic and Acoustic Methods&
^Osjks m%;srdj l%u - Echo Sounding&
fmdf<dj ;=<g Yla;sh hjd bka cks; Osjksh jdra;d.; lr N=.; wx.
wkdjrKh lr .; yel
fuu.ska oqraj, Ynso u.ska lsisoq wjfYaIhla fkdue;s wNHka;rhlao
wkqkdohla kxjk Ynsohla u.ska je<,S we;s j<j,a fyda w.,a ms<sn|
i<l=Kqo y.jhs.
w& ia:djr ;rx. l%uh ^Standing wave technique&
wd& fidakdra l%u ^Sonar&
1 mdraYajSh ialEka fidakdra ^Side Scan Sonar&
4 .=jka jsoq,s ;rx. yd bf,lafg%daksl iamkaok ^Radio Waves
and Electrical Impulses&
w& mdxY= Osjks fravdrh ^Soil-Sounding Radar&
wd& N+ fravdrh ^Geo-radar&
we& jsoHq;a m%;sfrdaOh ^Electriclal resistivity&