Roman Archaeology Essay
Roman archaeology, being the attractive subject it is, is in good condition as an institution. Over the years the discipline has been better at circulating information widely. Publication and fieldwork have increased in quality. Roman archaeology has found itself with strong leadership in the academic community. With commitment from academia and the energy combined with creativity of researchers from a variety of institutions such as universities, museums, etc. The increase of activity has, however, led to a marked degree of specialization. The effects are more obvious in some national traditions than others. Anglophone scholars in particular have not produced the same works of analytical synthesis as have either their Hellenist colleagues
…show more content…
or some of their European counter part (Woolf page 1)
It is easily recognized that there needs to be theory in Roman studies. In response to the many journals emerging in the 1980s, such as the Journal of Roman Studies, a group known as the Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, or TRAC for short, was established. A woman by the name of Eleanor Scott decided to hold a conference at the University of Newcastle in 1990 with the fundamental idea that the role of theory and the development of the use of theory in Roman Archaeology needed to be addressed and discussed (Laurence 2012: 20).
Eleanor Scott, went on record to say she noticed a “fierce resistance” to theory in Roman archaeology (Lodwick and Rohl, 2016). Steve Dyson, in particular, was one of the the first Roman archaeologists identify that often it is a better position to engage in questions deriving from anthropology than it is to undertake prehistorians or archaeologists of societies without writing (Dyson 1981). Today the group, as is Dr. Scott, is still active, holding annual conferences and maintaining a digital footprint with their own webpage. On their site, TRAC outlines its aims as a group. First and foremost, the group is to promote the discussion and role of theory in Roman Archaeology. Second, the group should provide a forum for senior academics, professionals, young scholars, students, the wider archaeological community, etc. to discussion and debate amongst themselves. Third, the group is to embrace and engage and value a diverse community. Forth, the group will organize a conference or conferences annually in response to carry out TRAC’s goals. Finally, the group is to produce a series of publications acquired from the conferences and any additional
activities resulting from TRAC’s overall aims (Lodwick and Rohl, 2016). TRAC’s site also gives a nice history noting that the group’s first conference was an international affair, with about 90 delegates from the UK, the Netherlands, the USA, and Germany. Although the conference had originally been thought up as a one-time event, after the first meeting, participants realized the value of the fruitful debates and discussions and the conference became a regular series. TRAC’s site also states that although the conference was “unorthodox, radical, and highly critical” it was still “distinctly inclusive and egalitarian” (Lodwick and Rohl, 2016). As a result, many of the participants of those early stages of the conferences now hold prominent academic positions at universities across the western world.
“The potential of Roman studies to contribute to comparativist debates is signaled more often than it is realized. In practice, few university Romanists are active participants in debates with non-Romanists, indeed most engage regularly only with other Romanists as far as re- search is concerned. TRAC has in fact remained largely focused on Roman Britain and on relatively few research agendas within it” (Woolf, 2004: 420)
or some of their European counter part (Woolf page 1)
It is easily recognized that there needs to be theory in Roman studies. In response to the many journals emerging in the 1980s, such as the Journal of Roman Studies, a group known as the Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, or TRAC for short, was established. A woman by the name of Eleanor Scott decided to hold a conference at the University of Newcastle in 1990 with the fundamental idea that the role of theory and the development of the use of theory in Roman Archaeology needed to be addressed and discussed (Laurence 2012: 20).
Eleanor Scott, went on record to say she noticed a “fierce resistance” to theory in Roman archaeology (Lodwick and Rohl, 2016). Steve Dyson, in particular, was one of the the first Roman archaeologists identify that often it is a better position to engage in questions deriving from anthropology than it is to undertake prehistorians or archaeologists of societies without writing (Dyson 1981). Today the group, as is Dr. Scott, is still active, holding annual conferences and maintaining a digital footprint with their own webpage. On their site, TRAC outlines its aims as a group. First and foremost, the group is to promote the discussion and role of theory in Roman Archaeology. Second, the group should provide a forum for senior academics, professionals, young scholars, students, the wider archaeological community, etc. to discussion and debate amongst themselves. Third, the group is to embrace and engage and value a diverse community. Forth, the group will organize a conference or conferences annually in response to carry out TRAC’s goals. Finally, the group is to produce a series of publications acquired from the conferences and any additional
activities resulting from TRAC’s overall aims (Lodwick and Rohl, 2016). TRAC’s site also gives a nice history noting that the group’s first conference was an international affair, with about 90 delegates from the UK, the Netherlands, the USA, and Germany. Although the conference had originally been thought up as a one-time event, after the first meeting, participants realized the value of the fruitful debates and discussions and the conference became a regular series. TRAC’s site also states that although the conference was “unorthodox, radical, and highly critical” it was still “distinctly inclusive and egalitarian” (Lodwick and Rohl, 2016). As a result, many of the participants of those early stages of the conferences now hold prominent academic positions at universities across the western world.
“The potential of Roman studies to contribute to comparativist debates is signaled more often than it is realized. In practice, few university Romanists are active participants in debates with non-Romanists, indeed most engage regularly only with other Romanists as far as re- search is concerned. TRAC has in fact remained largely focused on Roman Britain and on relatively few research agendas within it” (Woolf, 2004: 420)