From Things to Thinking: Cognitive Archaeology

Cognitive archaeologists infer from material remains to the cognitive features of past societies. We characterize cognitive archaeology in terms of trace-based reasoning, which in the case of cognitive archaeology involves inferences drawing upon background theory linking objects from the archaeological record to cognitive (including psychological, symbolic, and ideological) features. We analyse such practices, examining work on cognitive evolution, language, and musicality. We argue that the central epistemic challenge for cognitive archaeology is often not a paucity of material remains, but insufficient constraint from cognitive theories. However, we also argue that the success of cognitive archaeology does not necessarily require well-developed cognitive theories: Success might instead lead to them

Understanding scientific study via process modeling

This paper argues that scientific studies distinguish themselves from other studies by a combination of their processes, their (knowledge) elements and the roles of these elements. This is supported by constructing a process model. An illustrative example based on Newtonian mechanics shows how scientific knowledge is structured according to the process model. To distinguish scientific studies from research and scientific research, two additional process models are built for such processes. We apply these process models: (1) to argue that scientific progress should emphasize both the process of change and the content of change; (2) to chart the major stages of scientific study development; and (3) to define “science”

Emplotment as Epic in Archaeological Writing: The Site Monograph as Narrative

To emplot a narrative as epic is to present a story of vast scope and multiple plots as a legitimate member of a tradition of other such stories. This article argues that emplotment as epic is the broadest of three levels of plot in archaeological writings. At that level, the site monograph emerges as a characteristically archaeological form of narrative, fundamental to archaeology as a discipline and a source of chronic anxiety for archaeologists. The ‘stories’ told in site monographs are epic in length, diversity of materials covered and multiplicity of themes, plots and authors. Indeed, the more complexities of that sort the better, since those are features that help to emplot the work as good archaeology

Two notions of scientific justification

Scientific claims can be assessed epistemically in either of two ways: according to scientific standards, or by means of philosophical arguments such as the no-miracle argument in favor of scientific realism. This paper investigates the basis of this duality of epistemic assessments. It is claimed that the duality rests on two different notions of epistemic justification that are well-known from the debate on internalism and externalism in general epistemology: a deontological and an alethic notion. By discussing the conditions for the scientific acceptability of empirical results, it is argued that intrascientific justification employs the deontological notion. Philosophical disputes such as those on scientific realism can by contrast be shown to rest on the alethic notion. The implications of these findings both for the nature of the respective epistemic projects and for their interrelation are explored

BUILDING MATERIALS OF THE THEATRE OF MARCELLUS, ROME*

The building materials of the Theatre of Marcellus, 44–11 BCE, reflect Roman builders’ careful selections of tuff and travertine for dimension stone and volcanic aggregates for pozzolanic concretes. The vitric–lithic–crystal Tufo Lionato tuff dimension stone contains a high proportion of lava lithic fragments, which increase its compressive strength and decrease water sorption, enhancing durability. Sophisticated installations of travertine dimension stone reinforce the tuff masonry, which is integrated with durable concrete walls and barrel vaults. The pozzolanic mortars of the concretes contain harenae fossiciae mainly from the intermediate alteration facies of the mid-Pleistocene, scoriaceous Pozzolane Rosse pyroclastic flow. They have pervasive interpenetrating pozzolanic cements, including strätlingite, similar to highquality, imperial era mortars. Concrete walls are faced with refined Tufo Lionato opus reticulatum and tufelli, and opus testaceum of fired, greyish-yellow brick. The exploratory concrete masonry, which includes some of the earliest examples of brick facings and strätlingite cements in Rome, and the integration of these materials in complex architectural elements and internal spaces, reflect the highly skilled workmanship, rigorous work-site management and technical supervision of Roman builders trained in republican era methods and materials

BUILDING MATERIALS OF THE THEATRE OF MARCELLUS, ROME*

The building materials of the Theatre of Marcellus, 44–11 BCE, reflect Roman builders’ careful selections of tuff and travertine for dimension stone and volcanic aggregates for pozzolanic concretes. The vitric–lithic–crystal Tufo Lionato tuff dimension stone contains a high proportion of lava lithic fragments, which increase its compressive strength and decrease water sorption, enhancing durability. Sophisticated installations of travertine dimension stone reinforce the tuff masonry, which is integrated with durable concrete walls and barrel vaults. The pozzolanic mortars of the concretes contain harenae fossiciae mainly from the intermediate alteration facies of the mid-Pleistocene, scoriaceous Pozzolane Rosse pyroclastic flow. They have pervasive interpenetrating pozzolanic cements, including strätlingite, similar to highquality, imperial era mortars. Concrete walls are faced with refined Tufo Lionato opus reticulatum and tufelli, and opus testaceum of fired, greyish-yellow brick. The exploratory concrete masonry, which includes some of the earliest examples of brick facings and strätlingite cements in Rome, and the integration of these materials in complex architectural elements and internal spaces, reflect the highly skilled workmanship, rigorous work-site management and technical supervision of Roman builders trained in republican era methods and materials.Published728–742JCR Journalrestricte