A Capsule History of Archaeological Method

Until about 100 years ago archaeological method in the Near East consisted primarily of aimless treasure hunting.

In the latter part of the 19th century, archaeological pioneers like Heinrich Schliemann at Mycenae and Troy, and Flinders Petrie in Egypt and Palestine (see “Sir Flinders Petrie: Father of Palestinian Archaeology,” BAR 06:06) provided a vision that directed archaeology toward systematic excavation practices.

In the early 20th century, archaeological method was guided almost exclusively by principles of architectural analysis. Interpretive units, or loci (singular: locus) were defined architecturally, according to buildings, rooms or structural elements. Within this frame of reference, a stratum, or cultural level, meant a “building level.” Artifacts found in the excavation were collected and interpreted according to their association with these architectural phases. For a while, this method seemed adequate, especially when practiced by such skillful and sensitive excavators as the American archaeologists G. A. Reisner and C. S. Fisher at Samaria (1908–1910), Fisher and others at Megiddo (1925–1939), and more recently by the Israeli architect Munya Dunayevsky at a multitude of sites.

However, as field experience in systematic excavations accumulated, it became increasingly clear that the archaeological autopsy of a mound or tel was incomplete if observation was limited to the architectural bones. In the 1930s Kathleen Kenyon introduced at Samaria a technique developed by her mentor, Sir Mortimer Wheeler, known a debris analysis.