On interdisciplinarity in the humanities: A comment on Fanta et al. (2020) on the bias in dating obtained from historical sources

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F67985939%3A_____%2F21%3A00545241" target="_blank" >RIV/67985939:_____/21:00545241 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216224:14210/21:00123657

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2021.105392" target="_blank" >https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2021.105392</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2021.105392" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.jas.2021.105392</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

On interdisciplinarity in the humanities: A comment on Fanta et al. (2020) on the bias in dating obtained from historical sources

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Medieval settlement history in Europe is a common topic in several scientific disciplines. Recently, Fanta et al. (2020) examined colonization processes in Bohemia through the comparison of archaeological evidence and historical records. They concluded that the first mentions of settlements in historical documents are not reliable sources for settlement dating and should always be verified and preferably superseded by archaeological data, which are, in contrast, mostly unproblematic. We argue that this conclusion is controversial from several aspects. Firstly, it neglects the disciplinary constraints of archaeological evidence for medieval settlement development, as regards quality and chronology. Secondly, there are several legitimate perspectives from which to analyse the data. Our reanalysis of the original dataset showed that – in partial contrast to the conclusions of Fanta et al. (2020) – when viewed from the point of view of historical evidence, the time lag between the historical and archaeological dating increased with time and that the historical dating of most of the settlements between the 10th and 13th centuries was supported by archaeological evidence. Lastly, we demonstrated how research combining different disciplines (archaeology, history, palaeoecology, geography) and types evidence can reveal the manifold processes of human settlement dynamics. In our view each type of evidence has advantages as well as drawbacks, therefore strictly prioritising one at the expense of others hardly furthers the understanding of complex social phenomena.

Název v anglickém jazyce

On interdisciplinarity in the humanities: A comment on Fanta et al. (2020) on the bias in dating obtained from historical sources

Popis výsledku anglicky

Medieval settlement history in Europe is a common topic in several scientific disciplines. Recently, Fanta et al. (2020) examined colonization processes in Bohemia through the comparison of archaeological evidence and historical records. They concluded that the first mentions of settlements in historical documents are not reliable sources for settlement dating and should always be verified and preferably superseded by archaeological data, which are, in contrast, mostly unproblematic. We argue that this conclusion is controversial from several aspects. Firstly, it neglects the disciplinary constraints of archaeological evidence for medieval settlement development, as regards quality and chronology. Secondly, there are several legitimate perspectives from which to analyse the data. Our reanalysis of the original dataset showed that – in partial contrast to the conclusions of Fanta et al. (2020) – when viewed from the point of view of historical evidence, the time lag between the historical and archaeological dating increased with time and that the historical dating of most of the settlements between the 10th and 13th centuries was supported by archaeological evidence. Lastly, we demonstrated how research combining different disciplines (archaeology, history, palaeoecology, geography) and types evidence can reveal the manifold processes of human settlement dynamics. In our view each type of evidence has advantages as well as drawbacks, therefore strictly prioritising one at the expense of others hardly furthers the understanding of complex social phenomena.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60102 - Archaeology

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GJ19-20970Y" target="_blank" >GJ19-20970Y: Land use, sociální změny a lesy v pravěku střední Evropy. Modelovací přístupy k interakcím člověka a životního prostředí</a><br>

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2021

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Journal of Archaeological Science

ISSN

0305-4403

e-ISSN

1095-9238

Svazek periodika

132

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

August

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

5

Strana od-do

105392

Kód UT WoS článku

000681104200001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85110477400