Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T11:09:20.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Post-post-medieval archaeology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Philip Riden
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the last war three new branches of archaeology have grown up in Great Britain. Two of these are now established and accepted divisions of the subject, with national societies devoted to their study and reputable journals for the more important work in their fields. The third has failed to establish itself and for many archaeologists remains no more than a curious oddity. Why has 'industrial archaeology' not received the scholarly recognition accorded medieval and post-medieval archaeology? Why has Industrial Archaeology not joined Medieval Archaeology and Post-Medieval Archaeology as an important outlet for archaeological research ? That these are questions in need of answer has now been recognized by at least some of those engaged in 'industrial archaeology' and it seems generally agreed that the subject is at a turning point, a 'teenage' stage, from which it can either advance or regress (e.g. Buchanan, 1970; Symonds, 1972; Harris, 1970; Hudson, 1971-73). In what direction it should advance is a problem that has yet to be solved.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Antiquity , Volume 47 , Issue 187 , September 1973 , pp. 210 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 1973

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ANON, , 1967. Editorial, Post-Medieval Archaeol., I, 1–2.Google Scholar
ANON, , 1969. Review of Longmans’ ‘Industrial Archaeology’ series, The Economist, 19 04, 75–6.Google Scholar
BUCHANAN, R. A., 1970. Industrial archaeology: retrospect and prospect, Antiquity, XLIV, 281-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BUTT, J., 1967. The industrial archaeology of Scotland (Newton Abbot).Google Scholar
CHAPMAN, S. D., 1972. The history of working class housing (Newton Abbot).Google Scholar
CROSSLEY, D. W., 1967. Review of M. RIX, Industrial archaeology (London, 1967), Post-Medieval Archaeol., I, 137–8.Google Scholar
GRINSELL, L. V., RAHTZ, P. A. and WARHURST, A.. 1966. The preparation of archaeological reports (London).Google Scholar
HARRIS, H., 1971. The industrial archaeology of the Peak District (Newton Abbot).Google Scholar
HARRIS, J. R., 1970. Industrial archaeology and its future, Business Hist., XII, 129–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HUDSON, K., 1971. The present status of industrial archaeology, in (eds.) Hudson, K. and Cossons, N., Industrial archaeologists’ guide 1971–73 (Newton Abbot), 15–22.Google Scholar
HUDSON, K., and COSSONS, N. (eds.). 1969. Industrial archaeologists’ guide (Newton Abbot).Google Scholar
LEWIS, M. J. T., and others. 1969. Flashlocks on English waterways: a survey, Indust. Archaeol., VI, 209–53 and Addendum, VII, 190–4.Google Scholar
MORGAN, B., I971.Civil engineering : railways (London).Google Scholar
MCCUTCHEON, W., 1966. Review of D. M. Smith (q.v.), Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd ser., XIX, 426–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PANNELL, J. P. M., 1966. The techniques of industrial archaeology (Newton Abbot).Google Scholar
RAISTRICK, A., 1972. Industrial archaeology : an historical study (London).Google Scholar
SLAVEN, A., 1968. Review of BUTT, 1967, Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd ser., XXI, 403–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SMITH, D. M., 1965. The industrial archaeology of the East Midlands (Dawlish and London).Google Scholar
SYMONDS, R., 1972. Preservation and perspectives in industrial archaeology, History. LVII, 82–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WREN, W. J., 1968. The Tanat valley : its railways and industrial archaeology (Newton Abbot).Google Scholar