Some classicists still deal with the ancient world as if archaeological evidence is of little relevance to their work. This can mean that territories or subjects for which there is little textual evidence can be marginalised or not studied at all. Similarly, many historical archaeologists, dissatisfied with their ancillary role, assert that material evidence for the ancient world can and should be studied independently.
Though efforts are being made--in some quarters at least--to erode these disciplinary boundaries, in others they have become increasingly fossilized, and rifts within subjects are leading to ever more isolated sub disciplines. While representatives of each different specialism may believe they have found the path to historical truth, the real truth is that the straitjackets of disciplinary boundaries--whether generations old or fashionably novel--are stifling innovation, creativity, and the possibility of illuminating the past with all the knowledge at our disposal.
This collection of pieces from international contributors explores the separation of the study of the human past into history and archaeology, challenging its validity and asking how we can move to a holistic approach. While the focus is on the ancient world, particularly Greece and Rome, the lessons that emerge are significant for the study of any place and time.