Narrative Provenance
From Chapter 6's discussion of discipline formation, this concept explains why it's crucial for Archaeobytology to refuse being just a "subfield." If it is absorbed by History, it loses its technical edge; if absorbed by CS, it loses its ethical soul.
"To define a discipline, you must say what it excludes."
Field Notes
Archaeobytology performs boundary work against:
- Digital History: They study the past; we intervene to save it before it dies.
- Computer Science: They ask "how to build"; we ask "what to save" and "who owns it."
- Library Science: They work within institutions; we often work in the guerrilla zones outside them.
- Activism: They protest; we build and document (though we share political goals).
The Threat of Capture: Without effective boundary work, a new field risks "disciplinary capture," where it is swallowed by a larger, richer department that dilutes its radical mission. Archaeobytology resists this by insisting on its unique synthesis of Archive (preservation) and Anvil (creation).
Praxis
Boundary work isn't just academic wanking; it's survival. It allows the field to:
- Create distinct funding streams (so we don't compete with historians for scarce grants).
- Establish tenure tracks (so our scholars get hired).
- Build a canon that reflects our specific values, not just those of our neighbors.