Publicação
Backstage of a new archaeology
| Resumo: | The 60ies were crucial for the future of archaeology in Portugal, leaded by people aware of the epistemic changes taking place abroad, speaking several languages and conscious of the need to update scientific knowledge to avoid the incidence of foreigner researchers in the territory. This was a time when a new institution – the ‘Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian’ -, together with the ‘Instituto de Alta Cultura’, began and continued to finance archaeological research in Portugal. Other institutions, such as the ‘Sociedade Martins Sarmento’ (Guimarães) and the ‘Associação dos Arqueólogos Portuguese’ (Lisbon), much contributed to the increasing number of young scholars dedicated to archaeology. Focusing on the first of these two institutions, we will recognize some actors, strategies, means, liaisons and outputs of this “transition generation” and the role it played in the modernization of archaeology in the country. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Martins, Ana Cristina |
| Ano: | 2019 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | capítulo de livro |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | Universidade Nova de Lisboa |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| Origem: | Repositório Institucional da UNL |
| Resumo: | The 60ies were crucial for the future of archaeology in Portugal, leaded by people aware of the epistemic changes taking place abroad, speaking several languages and conscious of the need to update scientific knowledge to avoid the incidence of foreigner researchers in the territory. This was a time when a new institution – the ‘Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian’ -, together with the ‘Instituto de Alta Cultura’, began and continued to finance archaeological research in Portugal. Other institutions, such as the ‘Sociedade Martins Sarmento’ (Guimarães) and the ‘Associação dos Arqueólogos Portuguese’ (Lisbon), much contributed to the increasing number of young scholars dedicated to archaeology. Focusing on the first of these two institutions, we will recognize some actors, strategies, means, liaisons and outputs of this “transition generation” and the role it played in the modernization of archaeology in the country. |
|---|