Secondary Context

Definition

Secondary context refers to the circumstances and associations that surround an archaeological artifact or feature after it has been removed from its original primary context. Understanding secondary context is crucial as it provides insights into how artifacts have been repurposed, moved, or otherwise altered through time, impacting their interpretation and significance in archaeological research.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Secondary context can arise from natural processes such as erosion, or human actions like excavation and collection that disturb the original setting of artifacts.
2. Artifacts found in secondary contexts can be difficult to interpret since their associations with other items or features may not reflect their original use or meaning.
3. Recognizing secondary context is essential for archaeologists to avoid misinterpretation of artifacts during analysis, as they can carry meanings that differ from their initial purpose.
4. Secondary context can also influence the narrative created by researchers about a site’s history, leading to potential biases if not carefully considered.
5. Understanding secondary context allows archaeologists to reconstruct past human behavior by examining how artifacts were reused or relocated over time.

Review Questions

• How does secondary context differ from primary context in terms of archaeological interpretation?
  • Secondary context differs from primary context in that it represents the conditions surrounding an artifact after its initial deposition. While primary context provides direct evidence of an artifact's original use and associations, secondary context may obscure this information due to disturbances that alter its meaning. For accurate archaeological interpretation, it's vital to recognize these differences so that artifacts are analyzed within their appropriate contexts.
• Discuss the impact of secondary context on the overall understanding of site formation processes in archaeology.
  • Secondary context significantly impacts our understanding of site formation processes by illustrating how both natural and human activities influence the archaeological record. When artifacts are moved or altered after their initial deposition, this can complicate the relationships between items within a site. Archaeologists must consider these changes when assessing site stratigraphy and interpreting cultural practices, which ultimately shapes our knowledge of past societies.
• Evaluate how ignoring secondary context can lead to misconceptions in interpreting archaeological findings.
  • Ignoring secondary context can lead to serious misconceptions in interpreting archaeological findings as it may cause researchers to misattribute meaning to artifacts based solely on their appearance or location. For instance, if an artifact is found far from its original site without acknowledging its secondary movement, one might mistakenly assume it was used in that new location rather than understanding its journey. This oversight could distort historical narratives and cultural understanding, highlighting the necessity of thorough contextual analysis.

Related terms

Primary Context: The original location and situation of an artifact or feature, as it was found in the archaeological record, providing direct evidence of its use and significance.

Provenance: The history of ownership and the journey of an artifact from its creation to its current location, including changes in context that may affect its interpretation.

Site Formation Processes: The natural and cultural processes that affect the deposition, preservation, and discovery of archaeological materials, influencing both primary and secondary contexts.