Andrzej Prinke

Can Ethnographical Data Be Used for Archaeological Comparison
Etnografia Polska, t. 17:1972 (1973), s. 41-66. Wrocław 1973, IHKM PAN.

Summary

       The author quotes several examples of the use of ethnographic data in recent archaeological papers and he analyses the underlying approaches and the attained results. The examples are discussed in three groups: detailed problems, concerning individual facts (like the function of some type of tool); generalizations of a broader extent (e.g., concerning the trade, the mining industry etc.); strictly theoretical considerations (like periodisation of the prehistoric epoch). The analysis has disclosed several typical fallacies related to the use of the ethnographical method; the most frequent of them are: post-evolutionistic identification of certain prehistoric peoples with modern primitive communities; drawing ethnographical data from unreliable or too general sources; a failure to confront ethnographical data with the investigated archaeological materials. No definite limitations as to the time, space, or type of data in applying the discussed method have been found. The main requirement is that sufficiently ample and varied ethnographical materials be used, permitting to formulate general regularities irrespective of any logical, geographical, social or economic differences. It is also methodically indispensable to test the working hypotheses formulated on the ground of ethnographical data by confronting them with the investigated archaeological sources. The failure of many former attempts at applying ethnographical materials in archaeology can be accounted for by the lack of this absolutely necessary element in the logical procedure.