Article contents
Archaeology and the Green movement: a case for perestroika
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2015
Abstract
Archaeology encompasses the study of human artefacts, and the largest of those artefacts is the landscape–at least in those many countries where human settlement is old and enduring in its impact. The landscape is also the domain of natural history. Yet human history and natural history are often treated as if they inhabited separate lands, and are addressed in different terms. Here is the point of their union, through a questioning of recent approaches to archaeology.
- Type
- Papers
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 1989
References
Drewett, P.
1975. The excavation of an oval burial mound of the 3rd millennium bc at Alfriston, East Sussex 1974, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society
41: 119–52.Google Scholar
Drewett, P.
1986. The excavation of a Neolithic oval barrow at North Marden, West Sussex 1982, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society
52: 31–51.Google Scholar
Greeves, T.
1989. Woodhenge echoes, in King, A., Deakin, R. & Clifford, S. (ed.), Pulp!: 43. London: Common Ground.Google Scholar
Hall, D.
1987. Fenland landscapes & settlement between Peterborough fr March. Cambridge: Cambridgeshire Archaeological Committee. East Anglian Archaeology
35.Google Scholar
Morland, J.
1988. New milestones — sculpture, community & the land. London: Common Ground.Google Scholar
- 6
- Cited by