Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T15:56:16.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of publishing processes on scientific thought: Typography and typology in prehistoric archaeology (1950s–1990s)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 June 2021

Sébastien Plutniak Open the ORCID record for Sébastien Plutniak [Opens in a new window]
Sébastien Plutniak*
Affiliation:
Centre Émile Durkheim, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France TRACES, CNRS, Toulouse, France
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Argument

In the last decades, many changes have occurred in scientific publishing, including online publication, data repositories, file formats and standards. The role played by computers in this process rekindled the argument on forms of technical determinism. This paper addresses this old debate by exploring the case of publishing processes in prehistoric archaeology during the second part of the twentieth century, prior to the wide-scale adoption of computers. It investigates the case of a collective and international attempt to standardize the typological analysis of prehistoric lithic objects, coined typologie analytique by Georges Laplace and developed by a group of French, Italian, and Spanish researchers. The aim of this paper is to: 1) present a general bibliometric scenario of prehistoric archaeology publishing in continental Europe; 2) report on the little-known typologie analytique method in archaeology, using publications, archives, and interviews; 3) show how the publication of scientific production was shaped by social (editorial policies, support networks) and material (typography features and publication formats) constraints; and 4) highlight how actors founded resources to control and counterbalance these effects, namely by changing and improving publishing formats.

Keywords

prehistoric archaeologyscientific publishingprint historystandardizationtypographytypology
Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 33 , Issue 3 , September 2020 , pp. 273 - 297
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Adams, William Yewdale, and Ernest, Wilcox Adams. 1991. A Dialectical Approach to Artifact Classification and Sorting: Archaeological Typology and Practical Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Adrian, Johns. 1998. The Nature of the Book: Print and Knowledge in the Making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
André, Jacques. 2002. “Caractères, codage et normalisation: De Chappe à Unicode.” Edited by Jacques André and Henri Hudrisier. Document numérique 6(3–4):13–49. https://doi.org/10.3166/dn.6.3-4.13-49 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audouze, Françoise, and André, Leroi-Gourhan. 1981. “France: A Continental Insularity.” Edited by Bruce Trigger and Ian Glover. World Archaeology 13 (2):170–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1981.9979824 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auroux, Sylvain. 2000. “Les langues universelles.” In Histoire des idées linguistiques: Tome 3. L’hégémonie du comparatisme, edited by Auroux, Sylvain, 377–396. Bruxelles: Mardaga.Google Scholar
Bordes, François. 1961. Typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. 2 vols. Bordeaux: Imprimerie Delmas.Google Scholar
Bordes, François. 1965. “À propos de typologie.” L’Anthropologie 69(3–4):369–377.Google Scholar
Boucard, Jenny, and Norbert, Verdier. 2015. “Circulations mathématiques et congruences dans les périodiques de la première moitié du XIXe siècle.” Philosophia Scientiæ 19(2):57–78. https://doi.org/10.4000/philosophiascientiae.1107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brézillon, Michel. 1968. La dénomination des objets de pierre taillée: Matériaux pour un vocabulaire des préhistoriens de langue française. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.Google Scholar
Brézillon, Michel. [1968] 1983. La dénomination des objets de pierre taillée: Matériaux pour un vocabulaire des préhistoriens de langue française. 3rd ed. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.Google Scholar
Brochier, Jacques-Élie. 2016. “Les datations radiocarbone du Tardigravettien ancien à crans de l’abri de Chinchon 1 à Saumane-de-Vaucluse et la chronologie du Paléolithique supérieur récent provençal.” Gallia Préhistoire 56:8–27. https://doi.org/10.4000/galliap.290 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broglio, Alberto, and Georges, Laplace. 1966. “Études de typologie analytique des complexes leptolithiques de l’Europe centrale: I. Les complexes aurignacoïdes de la Basse-Autriche.” Rivista di scienze preistoriche 21(1):61–121.Google Scholar
Coenen-Huther, Jacques. 2003. “Le type idéal comme instrument de la recherche sociologique.” Revue française de sociologie 44 (3):531–547. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfs.443.0531 Google Scholar
Davis, Natalie Zemon. 1992. “Women and the World of the Annales.” History Workshop 33(1):121–137. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4289142 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delfaud, Jean. 1973. “Quelques réflexions sur les rapports entre la Typologie analytique et l’Informatique.” Dialektikê: Cahiers de typologie analytique 1:8–12. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2583848 (last accessed December 24, 2020).Google Scholar
Fernández Eraso, Javier, and Rojas, Maite García. 2013. “Tipología analítica.” In Métodos y Técnicas de análisis y estudio en arqueología prehistórica: De lo técnico a la reconstrucción de los grupos humanos, edited by Marcos García Diez and Lydia Zapata Peña, 479–497. Bilbao: Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del País Vasco.Google Scholar
Fullola, Pericot, Josep, Maria. 1976. “Cova del Parpalló (Gandía, Valencia, Spagna).” Archivio di tipologia analitica 4:13–140.Google Scholar
Gardey, Delphine. 1999. “Mécaniser l’écriture et photographier la parole: Utopies, monde du bureau et histoire de genre et de techniques.” Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales 54(3):587–614. https://doi.org/10.3406/ahess.1999.279766 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardey, Delphine. 2008. Écrire, calculer, classer: Comment une révolution de papier a transformé les sociétés contemporaines (1800–1940). Textes à l’appui. Paris: La Découverte.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goody, Jack. 1977. The Domestication of the Savage Mind. Themes in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Guerri, Mara, and Anna, Revedin. 1986. “Elaborazione statistica computerizzata delle industrie litiche preistoriche. Metodo analitico-strutturale G. Laplace 1972–1977.” Rivista di scienze preistoriche 40(1–2):3–15.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl Gustav. 1965. Aspects of Scientific Explanation: And Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Hine, Christine. 2006. “Databases as Scientific Instruments and Their Role in the Ordering of Scientific Work.” Social Studies of Science 36 (2):269–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312706054047 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoyningen-Huene, Paul. 2013. Systematicity: The Nature of Science. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubert, Henry. 1925. “Description d’objets néolithiques de l’Afrique Occidentale française.” Bulletin du Comité d’Études historiques et scientifiques de l’Afrique Occidentale Française 10:262–297.Google Scholar
Isaac, Manuel Gustavo. 2013. “L’idéographie: une écriture de la pensée entre syntaxe et sémantique.” Les dossiers de HEL 9:212–236.Google Scholar
Kantman, Sönmez. 1969. “Essai sur la formation de concept du ‘type’ dans l’étude du Paléolithique.” Quartär 69:69–77. https://doi.org/10.7485/QU20_03 (last accessed December 24, 2020).Google Scholar
Klejn, Leo S. 1982. Archaeological Typology. Translated by Penelope Dole. BAR International Series 153. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Knuth, Donald E. 1979. “Mathematical Typography.” Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society: (New Series) 1(2):337–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krieger, Alex D. 1944. “The Typological Concept.” American Antiquity 9(3):271–288. https:/doi.org/10.2307/275785 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristiansen, Kristian. 2001. “Borders of Ignorance: Research Communities and Language.” In Quo Vadis Archaeologia? Whither European Archaeology in the 21st Century?, edited by Kobyliński, Zbigniew, 38–44. Warsaw: Institute of Archaeology; Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences; Foundation “Res Publica Multiethnica.”Google Scholar
Lamy, Jérôme. 2009. “Noblesse et servitude du calcul astronomique. Les astronomes toulousains et la hiérarchie des mathématiques aux 18e et 19e siècles.” Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances 3 (2):253–272. https://doi.org/10.3917/rac.007.0253 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, Valter. 2000. “Archaeology and Language.” Fennoscandia Archaeologica 17:103–111.Google Scholar
Laplace, Georges. 1962. “Solutréen et foyers solutréens. Essai de typologie analytique sur le phénomène de solutréanisation.” Munibe: Revista de la Sociedad de Ciencias Naturales Aranzadi 14(3–4):414–455.Google Scholar
Laplace, Georges. 1964. Essai de typologie systématique. Annali dell’Università di Ferrara. Nuove serie, Sezione XV, Paleontologia Umana et Paleontologia, 1, Supplemento 2. Università degli Studi di Ferrara.Google Scholar
Laplace, Georges. 1966a. “Le Magdalénien du Grand Abri Charasse à Entrechaux (Vaucluse).” In In memoriam do Abade Henri Breuil, 9:3–30. Separata da Revista da Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa. Lisboa: Universidade de Lisboa.Google Scholar
Laplace, Georges. 1966b. Recherches sur l’origine et l’évolution des complexes leptolithiques. Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire 4. Paris: De Boccard. https://www.persee.fr/doc/efr_0000-0000_1966_mon_4_1 Google Scholar
Laplace, Georges. 1968. “Recherches de typologie analytique 1968.” Origini: Preistoria e protostoria delle civiltà antiche 2: 7–64.Google Scholar
Laplace, Georges. 1974. “La typologie analytique et structurale : base rationnelle d’étude des industries lithiques et osseuses.” In Les banques de données archéologiques, edited by Mario Borillo and Jean-Claude Gardin, 91–143. Colloques nationaux du Centre national de la recherche scientifique 932. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.Google Scholar
Laplace, Georges, and Michel, Livache. 1975. “Précisions sur la démarche de l’analyse structurale.” Dialektikê: Cahiers de typologie analytique 3:8–21. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2583942 (last accessed December 24, 2020).Google Scholar
Laplace-Jauretche, Georges. 1957. “Typologie analytique: Application d’une nouvelle méthode d’étude des formes et des structures aux industries à lames et lamelles.” Quaternaria 4:133–164.Google Scholar
Laugier, Maurice. 2003. “La composition des mathématiques: Évolution des techniques au travers d’une expérience professionnelle.” Cahiers GUTenberg 43:5–32. http://cahiers.gutenberg.eu.org/fitem?id=CG_2003___43_5_0 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenoir, Timothy, ed. 1998. Inscribing Science: Scientific Texts and the Materiality of Communication. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Livache, Michel. 1997. “Exploitation d’une base de données de typologie analytique par un programme informatique simple: Codage et utilisation.” Archivio di tipologia analitica 20:133–136.Google Scholar
Livache, Michel, and Jacques-Élie, Brochier. 2003. “L’évolution des industries pléni et tardiglaciaires en Provence et dans le bassin bas-rhodanien, lignées et convergences.” Rivista di scienze preistoriche 53:37–55.Google Scholar
Lowood, Henry E., and Rider, Robin E.. 1994. “Literary Technology and Typographic Culture: The Instrument of Print in Early Modern Science.” Perspectives on Science 2 (1):1–37.Google Scholar
McKenzie, Donald Francis. 2004. Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mora, Torcal, Rafael, Genís Roca i Verard, and Moreno, Jorge Martínez. 1990. “Estadística en arqueología: El programa GTS.” Archivo español de arqueología 63(161–162):371–380.Google Scholar
Odell, George H. 2004. Lithic Analysis. Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory, and Technique. New York: Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9009-9 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olivier, Laurent, and Anick, Coudart. 1995. “French Tradition and the Central Place of History in the Human Sciences: Preamble to a Dialogue between Robinson Crusoe and His Man Friday.” In Theory in Archaeology: A World Perspective, edited by Peter, J. Ucko, 357–375. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Plutniak, Sébastien. 2017a. “Georges Laplace’s Archaeological Offprint Collection.” Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1235446 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plutniak, Sébastien. 2017b. “L’innovation méthodologique, entre bifurcation personnelle et formation des disciplines : les entrées en archéologie de Georges Laplace et de Jean-Claude Gardin.” Revue d’histoire des sciences humaines 31:113–139. https://doi.org/10.4000/rhsh.435 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plutniak, Sébastien. 2017c. “The Professionalisation of Science – Claim and Refusal: Discipline Building and Ideals of Scientific Autonomy in the Growth of Prehistoric Archaeology. The Case of Georges Laplace’s Group of Typologie Analytique, 1950s–1990s.” Organon 49:105–154.Google Scholar
Plutniak, Sébastien. 2018. “A Co-Authorship Network Analysis of National and International Growth in Prehistoric Archaeology, Italy (1875–2000): Combining Bibliometric and Qualitative Data in History of Science Research.” Mélanges de L’École Française de Rome – Italie et Méditerranée Modernes et Contemporaines 130(2): 417–430. https://doi.org/10.4000/mefrim.4052 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plutniak, Sébastien. 2019. “Quinze ans de théorie et de méthodologie archéologique francophone : un retour sur les rapports entre science, politique, et édition, à l’occasion de la diffusion numérique de la revue Dialektikê. Cahiers de typologie analytique (1972–1987).” Les Nouvelles de l’archéologie 155: 36–41. https://doi.org/10.4000/nda.5861 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plutniak, Sébastien, and Massimo, Tarantini. 2016. “An Influential Outsider: Georges Laplace Between French Institutions and Italian Prehistory.” In History of Archaeology: International Perspectives, edited by Delley, Géraldine, Díaz-Andreu, Margarita, François Djindjian, Víctor M. Fernández, Alessandro Guidi, and Kaeser, Marc-Antoine, 79–89. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Rider, Robin E. 1998. “Shaping Information: Mathematics, Computing, and Typography.” In Inscribing Science: Scientific Texts and the Materiality of Communication, edited by Lenoir, Timothy, 39–54. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Sáenz de Buruaga, Andoni. 1991. El paleolítico superior de la Cueva de Gatzarria (Zuberoa, País Vasco). Anejos de Veleia, Series maior 6. Leioa: Instituto de Ciencias de la Antigüedad, Servicio Editorial, Universidad del País Vasco.Google Scholar
Shapin, Steven, and Simon, Schaffer. 1985. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sonneville-Bordes, Denise de, and Perrot, Jean. 1954. “Lexique typologique du Paléolithique supérieur : Outillage lithique - I Grattoirs - II Outils solutréens.” Bulletin de la Société préhistorique de France 51(7): 327–335. https://doi.org/10.3406/bspf.1954.3106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soulier, Philippe. 2007. “Un siècle de Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française (1904–2004) : déambulation bibliographique au cœur d’une société, savante et centenaire.” In Un siècle de construction du discours scientifique en préhistoire. xxvi e congrès préhistorique de France, Congrès du centenaire de la Société préhistorique française, edited by Jacques Évin, 27–125. Paris: Société préhistorique française.Google Scholar
Tarantini, Massimo. 2005. “Georges Laplace in Italia tra tipologismo e antropologismo: Appunti per una riflessione storica.” Rivista di scienze preistoriche, Supplemento 1, 55: 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1400/206777 (last accessed December 24, 2020).Google Scholar
Tixier, Jacques. 1963. Typologie de l’Épipaléolithique du Maghreb. Mémoires du Centre de Recherches anthropologiques, préhistoriques et ethnographiques d’Alger 2. Paris: Arts et métiers graphiques.Google Scholar
Tomášková, Silvia. 2005. “What is a Burin? Typology, Technology, and Interregional Comparison.” Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 12(2):79–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-005-5666-4 (last accessed December 24, 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdier, Norbert. 2011. “Le libraire-imprimeur ès mathématiques Mallet-Bachelier (1811–1864).” Images des Mathématiques. 2011. http://images.math.cnrs.fr/Le-libraire-imprimeur-es.html (last accessed December 24, 2020).Google Scholar
Whallon, Robert, and Brown, James A., eds. 1982. Essays on Archaeological Typology. Kampsville Seminars in Archeology 1. Evanston IL: Center for American Archeology Press.Google Scholar