Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:22:34.201Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Guide to the Use of Museum Collections for Archaeological Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2018

Tammy Stone
Tammy Stone*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Colorado Denver, 1200 Larimer Street Room 4002, Denver, CO 80204, USA ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

From a perusal of archaeological and museum journals it is apparent that there is a rich literature dealing with topics such as the place of museums and repositories in anthropological research, engagement with indigenous/descendant populations by archaeologists working in a variety of settings (including collections-based research), and research centered on the study of existing archaeological collections. Despite this rich literature, however, the archaeological researcher who wishes to use collections in archives, museums, or repositories for the first time is often perplexed by how to gain access to collections, how to communicate with archive/museum/repository professionals, the constraints that archive/museum/repository professionals work under, and—at an even more basic level—what the difference between an archive, a museum, and a repository actually is. This article addresses some of these questions and provides a practical guide to opening up the vast research opportunities presented by existing collections.

Un examen detenido de revistas arqueológicas y de museos revela que hay una copiosa literatura sobre temas tales como el rol de los museos y repositorios en la investigación antropológica, el compromiso con las poblaciones indígenas o descendientes por parte de arqueólogos que trabajan en una variedad de situaciones (incluyendo la investigación basada en colecciones) y la investigación centrada en el estudio de colecciones arqueológicas existentes. Sin embargo, a pesar de esta rica literatura, el investigador arqueológico que desee por primera vez utilizar colecciones en archivos, museos o repositorios a menudo se enfrenta a perplejidades acerca del acceso a las colecciones, la comunicación con los profesionales de archivos, museos o repositorios, las restricciones bajo las cuales trabajan estos mismos profesionales y, a un nivel aún más básico, la diferencia entre un archivo, un museo y un repositorio. Este artículo aborda algunas de estas preguntas y proporciona una guía práctica para abrir las puertas a las amplias oportunidades de investigación presentadas por las colecciones existentes.

Type
How to Series
Information
Advances in Archaeological Practice , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , November 2018 , pp. 372 - 376
Copyright
Copyright 2018 © Society for American Archaeology 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES CITED

Archaeological Collections Consortium 2016 Building Common Ground on Collections: An Initial Glossary of Collections-Related Terminology. SAA Archaeological Record 16 (1):41–43.Google Scholar
Barker, Alex W. 2003 Archaeological Ethics: Museums and Collections. In Ethical Issues in Archaeology, edited by Zimmerman, Larry J., Vitelli, Karen D., and Hollowell-Zimmer, Julie, pp. 71–83. AltaMira, Walnut Creek, California.Google Scholar
Barker, Alex W. 2010 Exhibiting Archaeology: Archaeology and Museums. Annual Review of Anthropology 39:293–308.Google Scholar
Buck, Rebecca, and Gilmore, Jean A. (editors) 2010 Museum Registration Methods. 5th ed. American Association of Museums Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Burcaw, George Ellis 1997 Introduction to Museum Work. 2nd ed. AltaMira, Walnut Creek, California.Google Scholar
Bustard, Wendy 2000 Archaeological Curation in the 21st Century: or, Making Sure the Roof Doesn't Blow Off. Cultural Resource Management 23 (5):10–15.Google Scholar
Childs, S. Terry 2006 Archaeological Collections: Valuing and Managing an Emerging Frontier. In Of the Past, for the Future: Integrating Archaeology and Conservation, edited by Agnew, Neville and Bridgeland, Janet, pp. 204–210. Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Childs, S. Terry (editor) 2004 Our Collective Responsibility: The Ethics and Practice of Archaeological Collections Stewardship. Society for American Archaeology, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Goetze, Christine E., and Mills, Barbara J. 1991 An Assessment of the Research Potential of Museum Collections: The Babbitt Collection at the Museum of Northern Arizona. Kiva 57:77–91.Google Scholar
Keene, Suzanne 2006 Fragments of the World, Uses of Museum Collections. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
King, Julia A. 2016 Comparative Colonialism and Collections-Based Archaeological Research: Dig Less, Catalog More. Museum Worlds 4 (1):4–17.Google Scholar
Kirakosian, Katie, and Bauer-Clapp, Heidi 2017 A Walk in the Woods: Adapting Archaeological Training to Archival Discovery. Advances in Archaeological Practice 5:297–304.Google Scholar
Lindsay, Alexander J. Jr., and Williams-Dean, Glenna 1980 Artifacts, Documents, and Data: A New Frontier for American Archaeology. Curator 23 (1):19–29.Google Scholar
MacFarland, Kathryn, and Vokes, Arthur W. 2016 Dusting Off the Data: Curating and Rehabilitating Archaeological Legacy and Orphaned Collections. Advances in Archaeological Practice 4:161–175.Google Scholar
Rothschild, Nan A., and Cantwell, Anne-Marie E. 1981 The Research Potential of Anthropological Museum Collections. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 376 (1):1–6.Google Scholar
Silverman, Sydel, and Parezo, Nancy J. (editors) 1992 Preserving the Anthropological Record. Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, New York.Google Scholar
Surovell, Todd A., Toohey, Jason L., Myers, Adam D., LaBelle, Jason M., Ahern, James C. M., and Reisig, Brian 2017 The End of Archaeological Discovery. American Antiquity 82:288–300.Google Scholar